Who’s Slowing Down the Game?
Last week, I examined whether baseball’s pace changes were having an effect through the first quarter of the major-league season. The results of that investigation? That pace measures are melting some time from the game.
By limiting mound visits, by reducing time between innings — with some teams even employing bullpen carts — the average time of game has been reduced by five minutes. Starting pitchers have cut their average time between pitches by half a second to 23.1 seconds this year. The average time between pitches for a reliever is also down half a second to 23.8.
The changes are having an effect, albeit modest. Perhaps the change will be enough to reduce MLB commissioner Rob Manfred’s desire to implement a pitch clock, a device which he was close to unilaterally adding to the game this season.
To more substantially address pace, the game probably requires a pitch clock — or, alternatively, to better enforce rule Rule 6.02 (c), which states that “if the batter refuses to take his position in the batter’s box during his time at bat, the umpire shall call a strike on the batter.”
But before a clock is placed on every pitch of coming seasons, perhaps the commissioner’s office ought to focus on the players who are most methodical, who are most slowing down the action, those who are conducting their own personal intermissions during pitch sequences. While it’s difficult to perfectly assign credit for pace between hitter or a pitcher in any particular at-bat, when looking at a larger sample of work it becomes evident which players are really slowing down the game.
The following are the 10 qualified major-league pitchers on turtle setting, those working at the most deliberate paces…
| Rank | Name | Pace (pi) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Yonny Chirinos | 28.9 |
| 2 | Vince Velasquez | 28.4 |
| 3 | Carson Fulmer | 27.7 |
| 4 | Robbie Ray | 27.6 |
| 5 | Lucas Giolito | 27.0 |
| 6 | Justin Verlander | 26.8 |
| 7 | David Price | 26.8 |
| 8 | Shohei Ohtani | 26.7 |
| 9 | Yu Darvish | 26.5 |
| 10 | Jake Odorizzi | 26.4 |
For sake of comparison, here are the fastest workers. Interestingly, if a 20-second pitch clock were to be implemented, all but five qualified pitchers would be exceeding it, on average.
Should players have the right to work at their own tempo no matter how sluggish? Does it help their performance? Attempting to correlate pace with performance is complicated. Pace and velocity do have a relationship, Rob Arthur found at FiveThirtyEight. But it is possible that forcing high-velocity arms to work more quickly could lead to greater injury risks. There could — indeed, likely would — be unintended consequences with a pitch clock. Finding the right time amount for a clock would be key. Maybe 20 seconds isn’t the ideal numbers. But James Paxton and Sean Newcomb are among those offering evidence that one can be effective while working at a relatively brisk pace. Paxton maintains elite velocity with a quick pace.
While pitchers receive the lion’s share of blame for pace issues, this author suspects batters are equally, if not more, culpable in the matter. After all, it is the batter who requests time, who steps out of the box to take practices swings, adjust batting gloves, etc. What’s undoubtedly true is that both pitchers and batters are responsible for the speed at which the game is played.
As Jeff documented last year, Marwin Gonzalez has quite a routine between pitches. He was the slowest-working hitter last year (29.6 seconds) and holds that distinction again a quarter of the way through the current season.
The following are the 10 qualified major-league hitters who are the most methodical in going about their craft…
| Rank | Name | Pace (pi) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Marwin Gonzalez | 30.0 |
| 2 | A.J. Pollock | 29.8 |
| 3 | Odubel Herrera | 29.0 |
| 4 | Hanley Ramirez | 28.9 |
| 5 | Victor Martinez | 28.6 |
| 6 | Robinson Cano | 27.9 |
| 7 | Corey Dickerson | 27.6 |
| 8 | Gary Sanchez | 27.5 |
| 9 | Miguel Rojas | 27.2 |
| 10 | Buster Posey | 26.8 |
Let’s look at what happens when the game’s most deliberate pitcher, Yonny Chirinos, meets the American League’s most methodical hitter, Hanley Ramirez.
On April 28 in Boston, with two Red Sox runners on in the first inning, Chirinos and Ramirez had the most typical of intermissions between pitches. Chirinos, on average, takes 28.9 seconds to throw a pitch. Ramirez, on average, waits 28.9 seconds between seeing pitches.
After an 0-1 pitch was not swung at and caught cleanly, Ramirez and Chirinos required just under 30 seconds for the next pitch to be thrown. That’s a full shot clock in college basketball.
For the full-count offering, proceeded by a pitch in the dirt, Ramirez and Chirinos required 40 seconds for the following pitch to be executed.
Against the following batter, J.D. Martinez, there was a 53-second gap after the 0-2 offering.
That’s about three minutes of our lives we’re never getting back. This is the above the kind of dead time between pitches that baseball would do well to reduce.
How easy is it to do that, though? Can change occur relatively quickly? I asked Sean Dolinar to find the top pace changers from 2017 to -18. Of that group, 15 qualified pitchers have reduced their time between pitches by two seconds or more.
| Rank | Name | Change (Sec.) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Matt Boyd | -3.46 |
| 2 | Sonny Gray | -3.23 |
| 3 | Sean Newcomb | -2.91 |
| 4 | Danny Duffy | -2.83 |
| 5 | Michael Fulmer | -2.78 |
| 6 | Jon Gray | -2.76 |
| 7 | Jesse Chavez | -2.62 |
| 8 | Max Scherzer | -2.61 |
| 9 | Gio Gonzalez | -2.38 |
| 10 | Chase Anderson | -2.23 |
| 11 | Hyun-Jin Ryu | -2.22 |
| 12 | Charlie Morton | -2.09 |
| 13 | Kyle Freeland | -2.06 |
| 14 | Jordan Zimmermann | -2.05 |
| 15 | Sean Manaea | -1.94 |
What we can conclude is some players have a pace problem. What we can also conclude is players can pick up the pace without a clock. So perhaps, rather than placing a clock on everyone, on every pitch, the sport should first keep a closer eye on watching and managing its greatest pace offenders. Pace has slightly picked up in 2018 but not everyone is operating with urgency.
A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.
I wonder how a pitch clock would impact run scoring. Beyond the points laid out here, some batters and pitchers use the time to think of what they should do next. Which pitch to throw and where, or what pitch will be thrown and where. Reducing the time to think might impact one party more than another – my guess is batters, because the pitcher gets two minds thinking (pitcher/catcher, plus possibly coach too) versus just the batter.
Also, labeling the last table ‘Top Pace Increases’ seems a bit misleading. You describe it as the top changers, yet post the largest decreases but call it increases. I had to double and triple take to make sure it was about the largest decreases (and even now am curious if it shows the largest increase or decrease in pace).
(couldn’t edit the first comment, my apologies).
He says right before the table that those pitchers reduced their time between pitches. In addition, to increase your pace means to do something faster.
That’s weird. Every time Laurel Chirinos pitches, it seems to me like his pace is really quick.
What’s the correlation between the pitchers with big pace improvements and their control (estimated using Zone %)? Newcomb and Gray have been worse, not sure about the rest.
Nice article. This is a good example of exactly where the problem is. This is one of the absolutely simplest issues to fix, and yet they keep fumbling around and tip-toeing around it.
Problem solved:
(1) Make it illegal for the batter to leave the box so that 100% of the responsibility for pace is shifted to the pitcher.
(2) Tax the team for every second over 20 that they spend dawdling and divide the pot among teams that average 20 or fewer seconds over the course of the entire season.
This will speed up the pace without any fascist pitch clocks or novel punishments (“automatic ball”, blech).
What if the team was fined $10k for a game with an average of 21 seconds between pitches, $20k for a game with an average of 22 seconds between pitches, etc.? Suppose Vince Velasquez goes six innings and gets replaced by RPs that average exactly 20 seconds/pitch. The Phillies’ average pitch frequency for that game would come out to ~26 seconds, for which the Phillies would be docked $60k. The Phillies would respond in one or more of the following ways:
-send Velasquez to the bullpen or AAA.
-threaten to send Velasquez to the bullpen if he doesn’t pick up the pace.
-cool to the idea of offering Velasquez a contract extension.
-swallow the extra cost (over a full season, this would come out to a $2M penalty, a significant increase in the cost of employing Velasquez).
Yeah, one of the biggest markets in baseball, with a huge local TV deal, isn’t going to give a shit about a $2 million fine. Maybe the Rays, or the Pirates would, but not Philly. With the amount of revenue in the game today, few teams are gonna care about fines like this.
Just curious. How much time would be saved by eliminating commercial breaks?
Moot point. Commercial breaks are necessary because the pitcher needs time to make warmup throws before the half inning.
Lots, of course. But MLB dumped a commercial prior to this season. It was a pretty amazing thing to do so … now it’s on the players to do something.
Grant Brisbee compared similar games from 1984 and 2014 and found that there was little difference in commercial time. The biggest problem was players taking their sweet, sweet time. https://www.sbnation.com/a/mlb-2017-season-preview/game-length
This is not what you’re asking but:
What if they always did picture in picture for all the commercials during half innings (do they do this for the WS?)? Could it make a viewer less likely to change the channel?
And athough I think they already do this some of the time: They can show commercial(s) during long breaks of action, too. Like a play that is challenged, a trainer checking on an injured player…
A couple of notes about those pace calculations. I expect that they include pace between pitches with runners on base, as well as after foul balls? Those have to be treated differently when considering pace of play with respect to the rule. Also, you’d have to consider the time it takes for the catcher to return the ball to the pitcher, as well as any time the pitcher is in the set position but hasn’t pitched the ball yet. If the pace calculations are actually just differences in timestamps between pitches, the raw times don’t have a close enough meaning to how a pitch clock rule has been specified. If we strip out instances with runners on base (which is +7-9 seconds right there) and after pitches which produced foul balls, I believe we’ll get at least a better idea of who might be most affected by the pitch clock timelines.
What about relievers? only about 10% of the top 100 pitchers that take the most time between pitches are starters. When relievers get into the box score, the game slows to a crawl.
Are you related to Harry Classcock from Brockmire?
Where have you gone, Mark Buehrle?
I wonder how base runners factor into this ? Your example I would think is influenced by there being runners on first and second base. Could you make a more generalized study by looking at the various combinations of base runners?
I’m not surprised too see Price on the list. I’m surprised he’s not slower. The dude managed to take the fun out of an Ohtani start earlier this year. The Red Sox pitchers in general are just really slow.
I don’t think I’d want to eliminate batters being able to call time. There are plenty of times where a batter waits a ridiculous amount of time, and the pitcher seemingly has no intention of throwing a pitch. And, somehow, the batter calling time seems to immediately fix the problem!
There are some awful batters, but from what I’ve watched over the years, it it’s way more a pitchers problem than a batter problem.
It would be interesting to know how many pitchers are ready to deliver the next pitch within 20 seconds, but can’t because the hitter is futzing around.
Of course, pitchers could be waiting for hitters to be more-or-less ready before starting their own routine so they aren’t left waiting.
My wife thinks she is waiting for me all the time because I sit around for an hour plus waiting so that we are ready about the same time…doesn’t mean I’m the reason we are late.
I never agreed with the premise that the game needs to be sped up in the first place.
The reason given is that society is moving at a faster pace, people have shorter attention spans, etc.
But isn’t that actually an argument for NOT speeding up the game? It would be nice to have an ALTERNATIVE to today’s frenetic world with one quick dopamine hit after another.
The game never needed to be sped up until recently. Now that the players have slowed it down to a point where it can be painful to watch, it needs to be sped up to wheret it has always been.
Why do we keep talking about pace of play? You could just leave that misguided initiative to MLB… its literally the least exciting thing you could write about!