Location

My opinion, goal should be 100%. Why would a pitcher not expect himself to hit his spots 100% of the time? I would not say that it's reasonable for that to actually happen, but why would you try for anything less?

I know you don't want to throw strikes 100% of the time in a game. But, if you can hit your spots in a bullpen, you can hit your spots off the plate in a game as well.

I'm sure there will be others who disagree with me, but that's how I feel. When throwing to spots, get your guys to miss to the side they are throwing to. In other words, if catcher is set up on the outside corner, if he misses the glove, get him to miss further outside rather than over the middle or inside.

Boy tough one. I am not sure you can put a number on it necessarily. For FB location for example if you were locating down and out, I would think you want your pitchers to locate outer half or slightly off. This is a good pitch. I think from a pitching perspective the worst thing to do is to “cross miss” inside when you are calling for an outside pitch. It may be a strike, if you recorded this as “good” but not what you really want. Don’t know just thinking out loud.

For breaking pitches I think you are realistically looking for two types, a early strike freeze pitch for a strike, and an ahead in the count down pitch that must be down or at the very least the very bottom of the zone. If you are trying to throw that pitch and throw it for a clear strike this would be bad. Don’t know really know the answer - again just thinking out loud.

quote:

Originally posted by IEBSBL:
When we throw bullpens our program expectations are that with throw Fastballs for strikes 67% of the time and breaking balls at a 50% rate. I want to include a % for hitting there location. What do you think would be a good goals for Fastballs and Changes/Breaking Balls?

We do our bullpens where they first get good and warm and then start at the low outside corner until they can consistantly hit that spot with the fastball. Then we move to the low inside corner until they can consistantly hit that spot with fastball and then move to the up and in location until they hit that spot with fastball. Then down the middle with fastball. Then we work on change-up not worrying about side to side as much as location just out of strike zone down until they feel comfortable. Then they throw the breaking ball first on the inside of the strike zone until they can hit it consistantly and then move down and away throwing out of the strike zone consistantly.

As far as percentages of hitting spots, it is going to be difficult from one pitcher to the next. You almost have to create a goal system for each individual pitcher instead of anything generally covering all. We only have one pitcher on our team that is consistant with hitting spots and his goals are obviously different than the one who has a hard time hitting the red side of a barn! Some of our pitchers have no control over their offspeed stuff while others have begun to place one of their offspeed pitches. Keeping a chart of their bullpen with each individual pitches location will at least give you a place to start with each individual pitcher in setting goals. It is a lot of work and generally can only really be worked with pitchers who really want to work hard at it and on a consistant basis. I myself keep mental stats of each pitcher's bullpen and know what they each individually need to work on. Each one knows where they need to improve and that is done both in the bullpen and then as it translates into games.

The better colleges around here take high school kids and start all over with just location of their fastball and working on core strength, stretching and strengthening and improving velocity. Then they work just on the Change-up while breaking balls come down the road later on.

Personal drive - just get better each day/week/month.

Peer pressure - post the pct for each player.

quote:

Originally posted by IEBSBL:
When we throw bullpens our program expectations are that with throw Fastballs for strikes 67% of the time and breaking balls at a 50% rate. I want to include a % for hitting there location. What do you think would be a good goals for Fastballs and Changes/Breaking Balls?

Hey Coach,

The primary goal for pitchers is generally to throw 65-70% strikes during a game. So my question is why would you only require 67% strikes with FB's and 50% on breaking balls? I agree with bballman, if you're working out in the bullpen...the goal should be to hit your spots 100% of the time. And that doesn't necessarily mean for strikes...a FB up and in out of the zone, a breaking ball off the plate, bouncing a change up, etc......JMO.

quote:

The primary goal for pitchers is generally to throw 65-70% strikes during a game. So my question is why would you only require 67% strikes with FB's and 50% on breaking balls?

I got this from pitchng coach in college. From what he said is it is based on the fact that when he is throwing bullpens he feels that due to slowing down and fussing with mechanics he does expect the same strike% than in games. You do raise a good point.

I'm going to be a contrarian here. Hitting your spot and throwing a strike are not necessarily the same thing.

A good hard fastball up just out of the zone fouled straight back. Strike one.

A good curveball to start the bat. When it drops onto the plate the hitter has half-swung. Strike two.

A change up off the plate. Ball one.

Another fastball on the inner half. Strike three.

1/4 are strikes.. as far as charting location. All were good pitches. Sometimes a pitcher needs to learn how NOT to throw strikes.

I'm 100% with Bum on this one. When I'm throwing a bullpen I don't care how many strikes I throw, as long as I execute the pitch appropriately. If I want to throw a 57 foot curveball and I do, great. If I want to throw a fastball 6 inches off the plate inside and I do, great. Neither of those are strikes, but they are quality pitches in relation to my goal.

I agree with Bum too, in fact I thought my post basically stated the same thing..."I agree with bballman, if you're working out in the bullpen...the goal should be to hit your spots 100% of the time. And that doesn't necessarily mean for strikes...a FB up and in out of the zone, a breaking ball off the plate, bouncing a change up, etc......JMO."

Obviously Bum did a much better job painting a picture for us.

quote:

Originally posted by bsbl247:
I agree with Bum too, in fact I thought my post basically stated the same thing..."I agree with bballman, if you're working out in the bullpen...the goal should be to hit your spots 100% of the time. And that doesn't necessarily mean for strikes...a FB up and in out of the zone, a breaking ball off the plate, bouncing a change up, etc......JMO."

Obviously Bum did a much better job painting a picture for us.

I tried to respond to the OP, and I think that some of you got it better than I could but Bum did a great job, as I always thought my understanding was a bit different from what should come out of a pitchers bullpen than stated here.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
The better colleges around here take high school kids and start all over with just location of their fastball and working on core strength, stretching and strengthening and improving velocity. Then they work just on the Change-up while breaking balls come down the road later on.

Why do you think that they do that?
Maybe if they had been working on FB and velocity all along they would be going to college program OUT of the area, or top draft prospects?

Bum,
I agree with you 100% and we even have these things worked into our bullpen sessions. If you do not practice elevating or bouncing a pitch how can you expect your pitchers to do it when it matters. Thanks guys.

bsbl247: You did say the same thing, sorry. It was late here when I read this thread, I guess the mind retains information better when it's fresh.

GBM- Why would you ever want your kids to throw a ball right down the middle in a bullpen? That's never the goal in a game, so why practice something that you wouldn't execute on the field?

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
The better colleges around here take high school kids and start all over with just location of their fastball and working on core strength, stretching and strengthening and improving velocity. Then they work just on the Change-up while breaking balls come down the road later on.

Why do you think that they do that?
Maybe if they had been working on FB and velocity all along they would be going to college program OUT of the area, or top draft prospects?

Hum....that is probably a good reason why GBM son does just exactly that.....no brainer there. We work mainly on location of the fastball and increasing stamina, velocity, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
bsbl247: You did say the same thing, sorry. It was late here when I read this thread, I guess the mind retains information better when it's fresh.

GBM- Why would you ever want your kids to throw a ball right down the middle in a bullpen? That's never the goal in a game, so why practice something that you wouldn't execute on the field?

There are times in a game when a fastball down the middle is just what the doctor ordered. I don't know about where you guys play and what it is like but with a 3-0 count and bases loaded, I am calling for a fastball right down the middle. Maybe they don't play baseball like that where you come from but the way it's played here- if you desperately need a strike call, nothing better than piping one down the middle.

I even see that strategy in the majors as well.

GBM- I've been pitching for quite a few years and I've never ever tried to throw the ball right down the middle, nor have I ever had or heard of a coach advising it. It's not illegal to swing 3-0

J H,

So, with bases loaded and a 3-0 count you want a pitch on the outside or inside corner or something not close to the middle of the plate? Seems to me to be a bad decision especially in HS ball. The defense can't defend walks only balls put into play. Throw the ball down the center- pipe one in and get a dang strike for crying out loud. If the hitter does swing, perhaps he misses it and you live for another day.

To be honest, I have never seen a coach in HS that hasn't had his pitcher set up right down the middle in those situations.

I can see it now- With bases loaded, a 3-0 count, no outs, in the bottom of the ninth inning, the winning run on third, the pitching coach makes a mound visit. This is their dialogue-

PC: Johhny, I want you to try to paint the corner with a fastball, we don't want to give him anything good to hit.
P: But coach, I just missed three times in a row trying to paint the corner and now if I don't get a strike we lose the game. Is that what you really want?
C: This hitter has been known to swing on 3-0 counts.
P: But with bases loaded and the tying run on third? I doubt he has the green light.
PC: Look son- we never pitch "down the middle" ever! Paint the dang corner but don't give him anything good to hit.

Get the drift? Unbelievable. This is how it really goes-

PC: Son, throw the da** ball down the da"" gut and get a da** strike.
P: OK

I think the thing is to know the hitters on other teams that have green lights. I am not opposed to pipe a fastball in certain situations and we actually have a sign for that. I know at least at the high school level hitters are so ingrained to take 3-0 my guess you would get away with it more time than not.

GBM,
the more you post and try and insult and demean others, including posters who are successfully playing the game at levels you are not coaching and your son is not playing, like JH, the bigger the hole you dig, in my experience and opinion.
Frankly,I think others in this thread are again trying to be polite in describing how they envision a bullpen.
Since you want to come out and attack JH, I will be more direct and blunt: I have never heard of a good HS or college coach or pitcher speak of doing a bullpen of the type you describe.
For most, bullpens are done to simulate game situations and stay game ready and/or get game ready.
Having a pitcher in a bullpen throw to(at) one spot with a fastball until he can do it and then move to another until he can do it, and then throw them down the middle, until he can do it, sounds like LL, not HS quality play and coaching.
I don't believe the pitchers above LL get multiple chances in game situations to locate pitches in the way you describe you coach in bullpens.
As it relates to your new "dialogue," I would come at this from the perspective of a hitter and the parent of a coach who really studies hitting.
A good coach with a reasonably good hitter, in a 3-0 count, and the bases loaded will often, very often, coach them to look for a certain pitch in a very small zone.
If it is not in that small zone, then they take.
Right down the middle with a fastball(can I assume you also coach to take something off to get a strike?) would be your coaching right to the strength of the hitter.
In my view, you just made a .300 hitter a .400 hitter and a .400 hitter into .500 hitter and in HS, a .500 hitter into a .600 hitter, with the chance to drive in multiple runs and break a game completely open.
Nice coaching.
Good HS and above pitchers who don't work in bullpens the way you coach them usually have some command and have an idea about what they want to do in these situations.
They can locate pitches without being coached that they throw it right down the heart of the plate into the strength of a hitter. They can also do it knowing that the zone often expands 3-0.
They can do it because they practice it over and over and over in bullpens the way Bum, bsbl247, BOF and others are describing.
The thing which is amazing to me, and to use your term, "UNBELIEVABLE" is that you continue to post like you know everything and show you are completely un-coachable in what you don't know or other baseball strategies which exist.
I think cabbagedad might have mentioned something like that last week.

Infielddad,

There is nothing wrong with the way I coach a bullpen. It has been highly successful and one that I actually got partly from a professional pitcher who worked on our team. Each to their own

You can attack me all you want on this and in the end others will be left to their own choice on the matter. Not trying to pick any fights or anything so take a chill pill.

The reason I start down and away in the bullpen is that it promotes proper follow through and extension right off. Most pitchers are tight when they first begin to throw and usually everything is up- this because they are not getting good follow through. Hitting the low corner until they hit it consistantly not only promotes the pitcher to hit the best fastball location but helps get them stretched out to throw the bullpen and be consistant. Like I said- I have found it to be very successful.

Look, I don't mean to be mean to anyone. It was actually him who stated that what I was teaching was wrong- that you don't ever throw down the middle- ever. I had to state as a matter of fact that there are times in games- at every level where a fastball down the middle is warrented. Don't believe me- then watch some MLB baseball and note how pitchers often throw to pitchers at bat and they are behind in the count- the catcher sets up a fastball right down the middle. So don't tell me I don't know what I am talking about. You guys seem to hammer almost everything I say and yet you have no real proof to back up your claims.

I am just like any other posting on here- someone wants advice and so like others, i give it. What I am finding out though is that some just like to debate every little thing brought up by certain individuals.

Until you can prove to me that there are no bullpens or real live game situations where a fastball down the middle isn't warranted, thrown at the HS level and beyond, then we will talk.

GBM- I chime in on discussions where I feel as though incorrect information is being given, or where I feel as though I can provide information that can assist someone in a positive way. In this particular instance, both have occurred.

Since you obviously like to play the "anything you can do I can do better" approach, I'll take a stab at it. In my pitching experience, which includes All-State nominations in high school, All-America nominations in college and a conference leading ERA 3 years in a row, I have come across a lot of players and a lot of coaches. My time playing with the hundreds and hundreds of pitchers that I have had as teammates and dozens of coaches is my method for coming to my conclusion. The majority of these players and coaches have reached the collegiate level. Some, a smaller number, are at the professional level. Some, a much smaller number, are or have been at the Major League level.

Therefore, in my experience playing baseball...with all of those people I just name dropped and all the accolades I just brought up, my conclusion is this: I have never heard of anyone intentionally throwing a ball right down the middle in a bullpen or in a game. Not once, not ever.

If your experience has been different in your time coaching/teaching your high school aged son and his high school aged teammates then that is fine. To each their own, as you said. But that has not been my experience. My proof lies within my experience, just as yours does.

It is a matter of opinion who is actually correct, of course.

I was thinking of this situation- Suppose it was game seven of the world series, bottom of the 14th inning, in a 1-1 tied game, bases loaded, no out, a 3-0 count and Pujols in the box. What is the liklihood that Pujols will swing on the next pitch? I would say that even with Pujols up, he is more than likely not going to swing even if it is a fastball piped right down the middle.

Ok, now the pitcher- in this same situation, does he believe that Pujols will be swinging on the very next pitch? Probably knows he has the green light but chances are in this situation he isn't going to swing- he is going to take a pitch and see if he can induce a game winning rbi walk that wins the world series. So, what do you think the pitcher and catcher are going to call in this situation- more than likely the catcher will call for a fastball over the heart of the plate. This is battle for your life situation to throw and nail a strike. Your best odds of getting a pitch that is a strike is a target right down the middle. Just think- if the catcher sets up on the outside corner in a 3-0 count in this situation and the pitcher misses it by two inches to the outside and he loses the world series, he and the catcher and even manager are all going to look like idiots.

This is why I believe that a bullpen should include throwing strikes wherever the catcher sets up the target, even if it is right down the middle.

quote:

The thing which is amazing to me, and to use your term, "UNBELIEVABLE" is that you continue to post like you know everything and show you are completely un-coachable in what you don't know or other baseball strategies which exist.

quote:

Until you can prove to me that there are no bullpens or real live game situations where a fastball down the middle isn't warranted, thrown at the HS level and beyond, then we will talk.

Well, I think your response pretty much sums up what I said in my quote above, what cabbagedad suggested last week, and what many, many others have said or politely implied in this and many other threads.
Personally, I have absolutely no skin in your game and issues. Our son played at levels no one ever expected of him, except him.
He succeeded at every level and helped me become of student of his game, his success and how he played, studied and saw the game and others also played and executed the game.
Now I can watch a college or MLB game with him and he sees things I don't and knows things(options) to do when they happen that I didn't even know existed in the game of baseball.
He had some game AB's off Randy Johnson. He can describe for me his approach on nearly every pitch in each AB and what he felt was Johnson's approach as each AB progressed and from AB to AB.
Those were AB's executed at a level I never even knew existed.
As we discussed last week, (a discussion of options and approaches you also firmly rejected), baseball is game of strategy, and knowing which exist in any situation, and it is further a game about execution of that strategy.
Your view seems to consistently be there is only one strategy. Good luck with that approach.
How about I turn this around on you.
Unless you can prove there are no hitters who are coached to be highly aggressive, and actually hit .500 and above, with a small zone(aka fast ball right down the middle), on 3-0 count, with the bases loaded to break games open, then we will talk.
Whether one talks about my strategy or yours, baseball is about knowing each(or more strategies) and knowing the ability of each player to properly execute which strategy to optimize the result, recognizing even the best might fail in a game of failure.

JH,

So are you saying that even when a pitcher is warming up in the bullpen getting ready to come into a game that the catcher should never show his target down the center of the plate?

I actually watched several professional pitchers doing just this before coming into a game this year- the catcher setting up multiple times a target down the middle of the plate. I am assuming that this was because the mitt is a target regardless of it's relationship to the plate, especially when warming up. Can he throw strikes? Well, let's see- hold up the target in the strike zone and we shall see.

infielddad,

Respecting your experience, I am just going to say that I disagree and I think other will agree with me. There are times, especially at the HS level, where the catchers target is set up right down the middle with a fastball in certain situations, especially when a pitcher is really struugling to get a strike call.. One of our coaches from last year, who played professional baseball as a pitcher was the one who often called it.

Call it what you will but I have seen it all too often.

I have no doubt you must have seen it because you say you have.
Just because you have seen it does not translate to say that it becomes the right/best/only strategy in that situation.
Last week you saw a HC call for the squeeze with the bases loaded and no outs and you vented "steam" like few have on this site.
Like I said, just seeing it does not make it the best strategy in a specific given situation.
I assume, based on your vent, we might agree on this...

infielddad- Well said. Baseball is a learning process. Ignorance is not bliss.

I've said my piece...over and out on this one

Actually not over and out on this one, sorry. infielddad, your son is kicking the **** out of me in Words With Friends (scrabble via smartphone). It's very frustrating. Figured you'd enjoy hearing that

quote:

Originally posted by infielddad:

I have no doubt you must have seen it because you say you have.
Just because you have seen it does not translate to say that it becomes the right/best/only strategy in that situation.
Last week you saw a HC call for the squeeze with the bases loaded and no outs and you vented "steam" like few have on this site.
Like I said, just seeing it does not make it the best strategy in a specific given situation.
I assume, based on your vent, we might agree on this...

Good points made above.
FWIW, game time bullpens are completely different than practice bullpens. Before gametime the pitcher has to know if what he is throwing is working that day and to determine that is to hit your spots (or try).
3-0 count with bases loaded and one down the pike, could result in a grand slam I am not sure that is what a coach who knows what he is doing would call for. This could be batting practice for better hitters.
You ever watch anyone pitch to Albert, they don't throw it down the middle to Albert.
I have seen DK throw one down the middle on occasion, at 96,97 most likely you will produce a swing and a miss, and that would be his out pitch on a 3-2 count, ONLY.
BTW, just because some coach played pro ball doesn't mean he knows how to call a game.

I'd like to refer to the expression some of the dads whose sons played at very high levels used to say...garbage in and garage out.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
I was thinking of this situation- Suppose it was game seven of the world series, bottom of the 14th inning, in a 1-1 tied game, bases loaded, no out, a 3-0 count and Pujols in the box. What is the liklihood that Pujols will swing on the next pitch? I would say that even with Pujols up, he is more than likely not going to swing even if it is a fastball piped right down the middle.

Ok, now the pitcher- in this same situation, does he believe that Pujols will be swinging on the very next pitch? Probably knows he has the green light but chances are in this situation he isn't going to swing- he is going to take a pitch and see if he can induce a game winning rbi walk that wins the world series. So, what do you think the pitcher and catcher are going to call in this situation- more than likely the catcher will call for a fastball over the heart of the plate. This is battle for your life situation to throw and nail a strike. Your best odds of getting a pitch that is a strike is a target right down the middle. Just think- if the catcher sets up on the outside corner in a 3-0 count in this situation and the pitcher misses it by two inches to the outside and he loses the world series, he and the catcher and even manager are all going to look like idiots.

This is why I believe that a bullpen should include throwing strikes wherever the catcher sets up the target, even if it is right down the middle.

Yikes, I just saw this one from GBM.
Well, GBM, if they are in the 14th inning and the pitchers spot or a .190 substitute is coming up next behind Pujols, I think you are totally off base grooving one and thinking Pujols won't swing and is not looking fastball in a very small zone.
As I posted before, each situation involves more than, apparently, what you are seeing.
Also, it makes a big difference whether Pujols chooses to take a strike or LaRussa gives him the take. I doubt the latter, I truly do.
Finally, Pujols will have a scouting report and likely know tendencies of that pitcher in this situation and if he doesn't, LaRussa and the hitting coach will tell him.
I would also question your views and apparent position that a MLB pitcher who gets paid to throw strikes isn't going to know Pujols is looking for a certain pitch. I would also question your views and apparent position that a MLB pitcher in the 14th inning of the 7th game is standing out there but he cannot command a strike someplace other than in the center of the plate, thigh high.
To suggest the best hitter in baseball, no matter what the situation or hitter behind him, is trying to coax a walk as opposed to driving a 3-0 cripple in the middle of the plate when a sac fly, groundout, and just about everything other than a pop out and/or force at home scores the winning run...well, we clearly see a very different game in terms of how a situation gets played and coached/managed.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
The better colleges around here take high school kids and start all over with just location of their fastball and working on core strength, stretching and strengthening and improving velocity. Then they work just on the Change-up while breaking balls come down the road later on.

Why do you think that they do that?
Maybe if they had been working on FB and velocity all along they would be going to college program OUT of the area, or top draft prospects?

Hum....that is probably a good reason why GBM son does just exactly that.....no brainer there. We work mainly on location of the fastball and increasing stamina, velocity, etc.

They have to do it because dads and coaches think that breaking balls are more important! When lil johnny should have been working on his FB, dad was encouraging curve balls.

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
Actually not over and out on this one, sorry. infielddad, your son is kicking the **** out of me in Words With Friends (scrabble via smartphone). It's very frustrating. Figured you'd enjoy hearing that

So he actually learned a few things at Trinity....

BOF- Apparently so. Who woulda thunk them coaches got brains like that, ya know?

Come on JH it's dem couches, dem couches.

You're trying to tell me that MLB pitchers don't throw FB down the middle on 3-0 count? Are you guys on crack?

quote:

Originally posted by SultanofSwat:
You're trying to tell me that MLB pitchers don't throw FB down the middle on 3-0 count? Are you guys on crack?

No one said that.

To help you along, the discussion wasn't whether 3-0 fastballs right down the center occur in MLB. The discussion was whether that was the right coaching approach in every situation, including with Pujols at bat in the 14th inning of the WS with the bases loaded and no outs.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
bsbl247: You did say the same thing, sorry. It was late here when I read this thread, I guess the mind retains information better when it's fresh.

GBM- Why would you ever want your kids to throw a ball right down the middle in a bullpen? That's never the goal in a game, so why practice something that you wouldn't execute on the field?

There are times in a game when a fastball down the middle is just what the doctor ordered. I don't know about where you guys play and what it is like but with a 3-0 count and bases loaded, I am calling for a fastball right down the middle. Maybe they don't play baseball like that where you come from but the way it's played here- if you desperately need a strike call, nothing better than piping one down the middle.

I even see that strategy in the majors as well.

This was the scenerio given was it not?

This is the strategy in the majors? Where?

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
bsbl247: You did say the same thing, sorry. It was late here when I read this thread, I guess the mind retains information better when it's fresh.

GBM- Why would you ever want your kids to throw a ball right down the middle in a bullpen? That's never the goal in a game, so why practice something that you wouldn't execute on the field?

There are times in a game when a fastball down the middle is just what the doctor ordered. I don't know about where you guys play and what it is like but with a 3-0 count and bases loaded, I am calling for a fastball right down the middle. Maybe they don't play baseball like that where you come from but the way it's played here- if you desperately need a strike call, nothing better than piping one down the middle.

I even see that strategy in the majors as well.

This was the scenerio given was it not?

This is the strategy in the majors? Where?

Did you watch any of the Braves vs. Phillies tonight? Game on the line, bottom of the ninth inning, tying run in scoring position, Kimbrel behind in the count, and where does McCann set up for the next pitch- FASTBALL DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE PLATE. He actually set up several times in the inning- fastball down the middle of the plate.

Need I say more? Get off my back now, let's move on. This is getting ridiculous.

quote:

Originally posted by infielddad:

quote:

Originally posted by SultanofSwat:
You're trying to tell me that MLB pitchers don't throw FB down the middle on 3-0 count? Are you guys on crack?

No one said that.

To help you along, the discussion wasn't whether 3-0 fastballs right down the center occur in MLB. The discussion was whether that was the right coaching approach in every situation, including with Pujols at bat in the 14th inning of the WS with the bases loaded and no outs.

Infielddad,

That's a wee bit off. Originally it was about you guys grilling me saying there is never a time when you pipe one down the middle. Unbelievable!

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
bsbl247: You did say the same thing, sorry. It was late here when I read this thread, I guess the mind retains information better when it's fresh.

GBM- Why would you ever want your kids to throw a ball right down the middle in a bullpen? That's never the goal in a game, so why practice something that you wouldn't execute on the field?

There are times in a game when a fastball down the middle is just what the doctor ordered. I don't know about where you guys play and what it is like but with a 3-0 count and bases loaded, I am calling for a fastball right down the middle. Maybe they don't play baseball like that where you come from but the way it's played here- if you desperately need a strike call, nothing better than piping one down the middle.

I even see that strategy in the majors as well.

This was the scenerio given was it not?

This is the strategy in the majors? Where?

Did you watch any of the Braves vs. Phillies tonight? Game on the line, bottom of the ninth inning, tying run in scoring position, Kimbrel behind in the count, and where does McCann set up for the next pitch- FASTBALL DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE PLATE. He actually set up several times in the inning- fastball down the middle of the plate.

Need I say more? Get off my back now, let's move on. This is getting ridiculous.

Wait a minute you big jerk, go back and read my post, I NEVER said that they don't throw it down the middle did I?

What I refuted was that you would call it on a 3-0 count with bases loaded, were they loaded?

GBM,

Garbage in....garbage out!

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
bsbl247: You did say the same thing, sorry. It was late here when I read this thread, I guess the mind retains information better when it's fresh.

GBM- Why would you ever want your kids to throw a ball right down the middle in a bullpen? That's never the goal in a game, so why practice something that you wouldn't execute on the field?

There are times in a game when a fastball down the middle is just what the doctor ordered. I don't know about where you guys play and what it is like but with a 3-0 count and bases loaded, I am calling for a fastball right down the middle. Maybe they don't play baseball like that where you come from but the way it's played here- if you desperately need a strike call, nothing better than piping one down the middle.

I even see that strategy in the majors as well.

This was the scenerio given was it not?

This is the strategy in the majors? Where?

Did you watch any of the Braves vs. Phillies tonight? Game on the line, bottom of the ninth inning, tying run in scoring position, Kimbrel behind in the count, and where does McCann set up for the next pitch- FASTBALL DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE PLATE. He actually set up several times in the inning- fastball down the middle of the plate.

Need I say more? Get off my back now, let's move on. This is getting ridiculous.

Wait a minute you big jerk, go back and read my post, I NEVER said that they don't throw it down the middle did I?

What I refuted was that you would call it on a 3-0 count with bases loaded, were they loaded?

Yeah, who's looking like the big jerk now! You should learn to keep your fat mouth shut. I proved all of you wolves wrong tonight and now you gotta make some poor excuse.

LOL grow up man

TPM,

Oh, BTW, McCann set up down the middle several times both without bases loaded and with bases loaded.

JH,

Did you happen to catch the Braves vs. Phillies tonight? The National leagues best catcher (McCann) set up one of the best closers in the major leagues (Kimbrel)with fastball right down the middle on several occasions in the bottom of the ninth...

just sayin...

Hey guys, let's lighten up a little and keep it civil all the way around.

It's okay to disagree.

If a Pitcher had a target right down the middle, what % would they throw FB strikes?

It seems something is missing in the discussion. Brag Stockton raised the UH pitching in one year from below 100th to top 25 by selling the idea to keep the ball low and to quit trying to hit corners all counts.

It is a round ball and bat.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
bsbl247: You did say the same thing, sorry. It was late here when I read this thread, I guess the mind retains information better when it's fresh.

GBM- Why would you ever want your kids to throw a ball right down the middle in a bullpen? That's never the goal in a game, so why practice something that you wouldn't execute on the field?

There are times in a game when a fastball down the middle is just what the doctor ordered. I don't know about where you guys play and what it is like but with a 3-0 count and bases loaded, I am calling for a fastball right down the middle. Maybe they don't play baseball like that where you come from but the way it's played here- if you desperately need a strike call, nothing better than piping one down the middle.

I even see that strategy in the majors as well.

This was the scenerio given was it not?

This is the strategy in the majors? Where?

Did you watch any of the Braves vs. Phillies tonight? Game on the line, bottom of the ninth inning, tying run in scoring position, Kimbrel behind in the count, and where does McCann set up for the next pitch- FASTBALL DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE PLATE. He actually set up several times in the inning- fastball down the middle of the plate.

Need I say more? Get off my back now, let's move on. This is getting ridiculous.

Wait a minute you big jerk, go back and read my post, I NEVER said that they don't throw it down the middle did I?

What I refuted was that you would call it on a 3-0 count with bases loaded, were they loaded?

Yeah, who's looking like the big jerk now! You should learn to keep your fat mouth shut. I proved all of you wolves wrong tonight and now you gotta make some poor excuse.

OK, big guy, show me here where I said that you don't throw down the middle, I did say not on bases loaded, on a 3-0 count, please point out where I said that you never call for a FB up the middle, I said not on the 3-0 count. YOU DID SAY ON A 3-0 COUNT WITH BASES LOADED THAT YOU WOULD CALL FOR A FB DOWN THE MIDDLE. I argue that.

I am not going to move on, you come here make statements and then you don't like the challenge to your statments (same thing happened in your post on the suicide squeeze).

Here's his 9th inning that Kimbrel blew.
Polanco 1-1 single
Ruiz 3-2 strikeout
Francisco 3-2 walk
Rollins 3-2 walk
Utley 0-1 sac fly run scored
Pence 3-0 walk on 2 outs
99 4 seam ball
88 slider in dirt
86 slider ball
95 4 seam BALL
The count is 3-0 bases loaded and McCann does not, repeat DOES NOT set up for a FB up the middle.

quote:

Originally posted by IEBSBL:
When we throw bullpens our program expectations are that with throw Fastballs for strikes 67% of the time and breaking balls at a 50% rate. I want to include a % for hitting there location. What do you think would be a good goals for Fastballs and Changes/Breaking Balls?

How did you come up with those two percentages? IOW, what are they based on?

What you should do to figure out that percentage, is to first establish what’s a reasonable base line, and to do that you’ll need to know 2 things. The 1st is, what’s the definition of hitting a spot going to be, and the 2nd is how you’re planning on measuring it. Ex: The catcher’s mitt is determined to be the target/spot/location, and a “spot” is considered to be anything inside the perimeter of the mitt. That means if the diameter of the mitt is 12”, the “spot is much closer to 18”, the same way the plate us 17” wide, but a ball on the very edges widens it about 6 more inches.

Now on to the more difficult thing, measuring it. Who’s gonna be doing the measuring? The catcher, the pitcher, a coach? And measuring has to be fairly consistent from person to person, otherwise the data won’t be worth very much. So, is the measure gonna be how much the catcher has to move the mitt to catch the ball? Remember, if you use the perimeter of the mitt as a “spot” the catcher should never have to move the mitt more than 6-9” to catch a ball. If you’re gonna use some arbitrary thing like “It looked good to me”, you’re gonna have lots of trouble.

There you have it. Now you can check all your pitchers for 1 pen and establish a baseline for each, and what’s “normal” for the team.

But to be honest, I believe you’d get more meaningful information tracking where the pitch missed, rather than the percentage of times it missed. Here’s why. I think if you’re honest, you soon find out that pitchers hitting “spots” very often is much more of a wish than a fact. But even if it wasn’t, what would it tell you if Joey could hit his spots 90% of the time and Billy on 75%?

But, if you knew that 2 pitchers were RHded and Billy missed more often on his glove side when he was trying to throw a curve, and Joey missed more often on his non-glove side, it could mean a great deal to how you called pitches, and perhaps even give you an idea about what to look for in a mechanical flaw.

Just sayin’.

TPM,

Give it a break already. My argument was that when throwing bullpens we have the pitchers at some point set up down the middle. My argument was that there are times when a pitcher needs to throw one right down the middle. I then tried giving different scenerios where one would call for a fastball down the middle. You guys disagreed and tried to make me look like a fool (that's about all you guys seem to want to dao anymore). I then related how the Braves game last night had several situations where McCann set up for the fastball right down the middle. And yet, somehow that doesn't compute.

Give it up already. Let's not make fools of each other. We all truly know that when a pitcher is struggling to find the strike zone and he is walking people or is potenetially in the position to screw everything up, that the catcher will often call for a fastball down the middle.

Stop, think, and then let's both agree that this is true and move on.

quote:

Originally posted by baseballpapa:
If a Pitcher had a target right down the middle, what % would they throw FB strikes?

No one really knows, but a lot of people sure think it would be 95-100%. I’d sure like to find some of those guys who have lots of $$ and like to bet!

quote:

It seems something is missing in the discussion. Brag Stockton raised the UH pitching in one year from below 100th to top 25 by selling the idea to keep the ball low and to quit trying to hit corners all counts.

It is a round ball and bat.

From 100th what? ERA, Strike percentage, WHIP, or what?

Your point is a very good one, and if people were honest with themselves, they’d understand that that philosophy would work in almost every instance at any level. Way too many folks give kids credit for being able to do what very few of the best pitchers in the ML can do.

If you put a paper plate on a stick and place it right down the middle and at the height of what would be middle of the zone for a 6’ batter, what percentage of times do you think a “normal” HS pitcher would be able to hit it throwing nothing but fastballs? Once you have that number, the next day do everything exactly the same, but this time have him mix in other types of pitches, and throw from both the windup and the set. Which one do you suppose is gonna be a higher percentage?

Here’s my point. The average pitcher in a pen, and for sure in a game, could have the C set up in the middle of the plate and thigh high for every single pitch, and its very unlikely he’s ever gonna throw many balls right down the middle. And if you look at the numbers, here’s what you see. If a player aims dead down the middle and misses by as much as 9’ inches to either side, the ball’s gonna still be a technical strike, and a good one at that!

quote:

Infielddad,

That's a wee bit off. Originally it was about you guys grilling me saying there is never a time when you pipe one down the middle. Unbelievable!

Well, this is an interesting perspective to start a morning on the HSBBW. Not accurate but interesting.
GBM, I am done with any further discussions with you about baseball.
To read your post about the strategy with Pujols in the 14th inning with a 3-0 count in the 7th game of the WS and now read this revisionist post that this debate was all about there "never" being a time when you "pipe" one down the middle is just more of the continued changing and bobbing and weaving that is so constant in your posting.
As cabbagedad and others have expressed in different threads, there are better things to do.

Ha Ha Ha, evidently John Lackey was throwing fastballs right down the middle all season!

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
TPM,

Give it a break already. My argument was that when throwing bullpens we have the pitchers at some point set up down the middle. My argument was that there are times when a pitcher needs to throw one right down the middle. I then tried giving different scenerios where one would call for a fastball down the middle. You guys disagreed and tried to make me look like a fool (that's about all you guys seem to want to dao anymore). I then related how the Braves game last night had several situations where McCann set up for the fastball right down the middle. And yet, somehow that doesn't compute.

Give it up already. Let's not make fools of each other. We all truly know that when a pitcher is struggling to find the strike zone and he is walking people or is potenetially in the position to screw everything up, that the catcher will often call for a fastball down the middle.

Stop, think, and then let's both agree that this is true and move on.

No you give it a break you fool. I didn't disagree with your argument and I used DK as an example, there are times when a pitcher will throw one down the middle, again I am just refuting the situation that you gave, a 3-0 with bases loaded (why do you keep forgetting that you said that). If you make statements and people don't agree, then YOU be prepared for what is to follow, don't go back and turn it around (same with the topic on the suicide squeeze). Oh ok so now we are suppose to forget what you said? Then you make suggestions that McCann set him up for down the middle on a 3-0 and I am to take that as what really happened? I am going to argue that point, because no way do you throw a 95+ down the middle, these guys are too good for that and McCann is much smarter than that. Again, I do beleive that this is what you think you saw.

Here's the data against Pence on that at bat.
You can't tell me McCann set up in the middle, they were trying real hard not to go there, IMO. Maybe you think that is what you saw?

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...8_phimlb_atlmlb_1%2F

Stats brings up a very good point, all of these things make sense, but the truth to the matter is that I agree that very few HS players can do what people get paid to do often have trouble with.

this is one huge sandbox

Attention Please…

In the red corner, weighing in at 225 lbs out of the great state of Idaho…. wearing Silver trunks with Black stipes… we have the contender…. GINGERRRR BREEEEEEEAAAD MAAAAAAAN!

In the blue corner, weighing in at 110 lbs out of Miami Florida… wearing pink trunks with polka dot bra… We have the reigning HSBBW champion … TEEEEEE PEEEEEE EEEEEEEMMMM!

The referee for this championship bout…. Out of North California…. A round of applause please for… STATS4GNATS

The judges for this Championship bout…

From California… A veteran of many battles… Infielddad

From the great Northwest… The man they call, BUM

And from (baseball) Heaven… The Great Bambino, correction… SULTANOFSWAT!

LETS GET READY TO RUUUUUMMMMMBBBBLLLE!

PG,
You left out JH.

My point, try to get it right (or be able to admit you were wrong) and be prepared for those that don't agree, or don't post.

And I am not from Miami.

I was supposed to get a box of cigars for this gig.

Plus, they said I could be a manager.

how did tpm eatn the championship belt?

quote:

PG,
You left out JH.

My point, try to get it right (or be able to admit you were wrong) and be prepared for those that don't agree, or don't post.

And I am not from Miami.

JH is the promoter!
Kind of reminds me of a young Don King. Oh wait, I think Don was in prison when he was JH's age.

Sorry about Miami, is the rest of the information accurate?

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
TPM,

Give it a break already. My argument was that when throwing bullpens we have the pitchers at some point set up down the middle. My argument was that there are times when a pitcher needs to throw one right down the middle. I then tried giving different scenerios where one would call for a fastball down the middle. You guys disagreed and tried to make me look like a fool (that's about all you guys seem to want to dao anymore). I then related how the Braves game last night had several situations where McCann set up for the fastball right down the middle. And yet, somehow that doesn't compute.

Give it up already. Let's not make fools of each other. We all truly know that when a pitcher is struggling to find the strike zone and he is walking people or is potenetially in the position to screw everything up, that the catcher will often call for a fastball down the middle.

Stop, think, and then let's both agree that this is true and move on.

No you give it a break you fool. I didn't disagree with your argument and I used DK as an example, there are times when a pitcher will throw one down the middle, again I am just refuting the situation that you gave, a 3-0 with bases loaded (why do you keep forgetting that you said that). If you make statements and people don't agree, then YOU be prepared for what is to follow, don't go back and turn it around (same with the topic on the suicide squeeze). Oh ok so now we are suppose to forget what you said? Then you make suggestions that McCann set him up for down the middle on a 3-0 and I am to take that as what really happened? I am going to argue that point, because no way do you throw a 95+ down the middle, these guys are too good for that and McCann is much smarter than that. Again, I do beleive that this is what you think you saw.

Here's the data against Pence on that at bat.
You can't tell me McCann set up in the middle, they were trying real hard not to go there, IMO. Maybe you think that is what you saw?

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...8_phimlb_atlmlb_1%2F

Stats brings up a very good point, all of these things make sense, but the truth to the matter is that I agree that very few HS players can do what people get paid to do often have trouble with.

Obviously you didn't watch the game or you would have clearly noticed McCann setting up right downt he middle. Pitch FX doesn't say anything about where the catcher was setting up. And YES McCann did set up down the middle on a 3-0 count- RIGHT DOWN THE FAT PART OF THE PLATE to Hunter Pence on the 3-0 count. Even the stinking announcers both said that kimbrel needs to throw one right down the middle at that point! He threw 4 straight balls and Pence walked to load the bases. Medlen came in to relieve Kimbrel at this point.

Here is the pitch by pitch-

pitch by pitch

So, I guess in your book McCann is an idiot? Why would he set up right down the middle on a 3-0 count? Because he is smart.

Oh, BTW, I do believe the fastball he threw for ball four with McCann setting up down the middle was at 100mph.

I didn't hear the bell for Round 2.

I have truly enjoyed reading this thread today. PG that is classic post on the boxing.

My two cents - with an AVERAGE high school team / hitter (and below average) I'm going to throw majority change up down the pipe and hope for the best on a 3 - 0 count with runners on.

When you are facing a 3 - 0 count there are no good pitches against average to great hitters. It's a truly throw it and hope for something good to happen. It might be 100% down the middle or 90% down the middle. It might be a change up or a curveball breaking in or out of the zone. Chances are not in your favor to get a good result. To really say "THIS" is what you throw in a 3 - 0 count with runners on is probably not a good strategy because the good hitters will figure this out and tee off on it.

It's still pitching and it's still making good pitches when you need to. Sometimes it might be down the heart and sometimes it might be the breaking ball out of the zone (obviously probably wouldn't want to do this very often).

Learn to hit spots, mix speeds and learn to pitch.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
TPM,

Give it a break already. My argument was that when throwing bullpens we have the pitchers at some point set up down the middle. My argument was that there are times when a pitcher needs to throw one right down the middle. I then tried giving different scenerios where one would call for a fastball down the middle. You guys disagreed and tried to make me look like a fool (that's about all you guys seem to want to dao anymore). I then related how the Braves game last night had several situations where McCann set up for the fastball right down the middle. And yet, somehow that doesn't compute.

Give it up already. Let's not make fools of each other. We all truly know that when a pitcher is struggling to find the strike zone and he is walking people or is potenetially in the position to screw everything up, that the catcher will often call for a fastball down the middle.

Stop, think, and then let's both agree that this is true and move on.

No you give it a break you fool. I didn't disagree with your argument and I used DK as an example, there are times when a pitcher will throw one down the middle, again I am just refuting the situation that you gave, a 3-0 with bases loaded (why do you keep forgetting that you said that). If you make statements and people don't agree, then YOU be prepared for what is to follow, don't go back and turn it around (same with the topic on the suicide squeeze). Oh ok so now we are suppose to forget what you said? Then you make suggestions that McCann set him up for down the middle on a 3-0 and I am to take that as what really happened? I am going to argue that point, because no way do you throw a 95+ down the middle, these guys are too good for that and McCann is much smarter than that. Again, I do beleive that this is what you think you saw.

Here's the data against Pence on that at bat.
You can't tell me McCann set up in the middle, they were trying real hard not to go there, IMO. Maybe you think that is what you saw?

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...8_phimlb_atlmlb_1%2F

Stats brings up a very good point, all of these things make sense, but the truth to the matter is that I agree that very few HS players can do what people get paid to do often have trouble with.

Obviously you didn't watch the game or you would have clearly noticed McCann setting up right downt he middle. Pitch FX doesn't say anything about where the catcher was setting up. And YES McCann did set up down the middle on a 3-0 count- RIGHT DOWN THE FAT PART OF THE PLATE to Hunter Pence on the 3-0 count. Even the stinking announcers both said that kimbrel needs to throw one right down the middle at that point! He threw 4 straight balls and Pence walked to load the bases. Medlen came in to relieve Kimbrel at this point.

Here is the pitch by pitch-

pitch by pitch

So, I guess in your book McCann is an idiot? Why would he set up right down the middle on a 3-0 count? Because he is smart.

Oh, BTW, I do believe the fastball he threw for ball four with McCann setting up down the middle was at 100mph.

I got the play by play, pitch f/x, I got the playback and I saw it with my own eyes a few times.
Take a look at where the pitches came in on pitch f/x , they were no where in the strike zone, so that he didn't give them something to hit, can't you see that? Did you see where the pitch ended up, that wasn't a set up down the middle. DUH!


I didn't say he was an idiot, those are your words, why would McCann ever set him up down the middle with bases loaded with Pence? If there was a mistake the game would be completely out of reach, it's not like he had his best stuff working.

ML pitchers don't make it a habit of throwing down the middle with bases loaded, take a look at Price's pitch to Texiera that resulted in a grand slam. Do you think he was set up for that or it was a mistake?

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...8_nyamlb_tbamlb_1%2F

I think that you just think you get it but you don't. It's like your theory of using different arm slots, pitchf/x clearly shows that pitchers use the same arm angle..another duh.

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
TPM,

Give it a break already. My argument was that when throwing bullpens we have the pitchers at some point set up down the middle. My argument was that there are times when a pitcher needs to throw one right down the middle. I then tried giving different scenerios where one would call for a fastball down the middle. You guys disagreed and tried to make me look like a fool (that's about all you guys seem to want to dao anymore). I then related how the Braves game last night had several situations where McCann set up for the fastball right down the middle. And yet, somehow that doesn't compute.

Give it up already. Let's not make fools of each other. We all truly know that when a pitcher is struggling to find the strike zone and he is walking people or is potenetially in the position to screw everything up, that the catcher will often call for a fastball down the middle.

Stop, think, and then let's both agree that this is true and move on.

No you give it a break you fool. I didn't disagree with your argument and I used DK as an example, there are times when a pitcher will throw one down the middle, again I am just refuting the situation that you gave, a 3-0 with bases loaded (why do you keep forgetting that you said that). If you make statements and people don't agree, then YOU be prepared for what is to follow, don't go back and turn it around (same with the topic on the suicide squeeze). Oh ok so now we are suppose to forget what you said? Then you make suggestions that McCann set him up for down the middle on a 3-0 and I am to take that as what really happened? I am going to argue that point, because no way do you throw a 95+ down the middle, these guys are too good for that and McCann is much smarter than that. Again, I do beleive that this is what you think you saw.

Here's the data against Pence on that at bat.
You can't tell me McCann set up in the middle, they were trying real hard not to go there, IMO. Maybe you think that is what you saw?

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/...8_phimlb_atlmlb_1%2F

Stats brings up a very good point, all of these things make sense, but the truth to the matter is that I agree that very few HS players can do what people get paid to do often have trouble with.

Obviously you didn't watch the game or you would have clearly noticed McCann setting up right downt he middle. Pitch FX doesn't say anything about where the catcher was setting up. And YES McCann did set up down the middle on a 3-0 count- RIGHT DOWN THE FAT PART OF THE PLATE to Hunter Pence on the 3-0 count. Even the stinking announcers both said that kimbrel needs to throw one right down the middle at that point! He threw 4 straight balls and Pence walked to load the bases. Medlen came in to relieve Kimbrel at this point.

Here is the pitch by pitch-

pitch by pitch

So, I guess in your book McCann is an idiot? Why would he set up right down the middle on a 3-0 count? Because he is smart.

Oh, BTW, I do believe the fastball he threw for ball four with McCann setting up down the middle was at 100mph.

I got the play by play, pitch f/x, I got the playback and I saw it with my own eyes a few times.
Take a look at where the pitches came in on pitch f/x , they were no where in the strike zone, so that he didn't give them something to hit, can't you see that? Did you see where the pitch ended up, that wasn't a set up down the middle. DUH!


I didn't say he was an idiot, those are your words, why would McCann ever set him up down the middle with bases loaded with Pence? If there was a mistake the game would be completely out of reach, it's not like he had his best stuff working.

ML pitchers don't make it a habit of throwing down the middle with bases loaded, take a look at Price's pitch to Texiera that resulted in a grand slam. Do you think he was set up for that or it was a mistake?

I think that you just think you get it but you don't. It's like your theory of using different arm slots, pitchf/x clearly shows that pitchers use the same release points..another duh.

Poke..poke..jab.jab...


They were nowhere near the strike zone because he was completely off. That is precisely why he was relieved by Medlen. McCann was setting up the target when he was behind "right down the middle". The reason Kimbrel came out of the game was because he was nowhere close to hitting his target. The point of it is that McCann was setting up right down the middle with his target-0 you know- where the catcher wants the ball. You don't set up a fastball target right down the middle if that is not where you want the pitch. DUH! Breaking balls are of course different as you are giving a target often times to where you want the pitch to start and not necessarily end up. The fastball is different though- you set up where you want it to hit and McCann was set up right down the middle.



Oh, and about arm slots- that is another battle- one I already won. You keep trying to slide in misinformation on issues like that. They already gave me the TKO! That bout is old news.

Now back to the Thrilla in Vanilla

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
Oh, and about arm slots- that is another battle- one I already won. You keep trying to slide in misinformation on issues like that. They already gave me the TKO! That bout is old news.

Roflmao. Really, show us where everyone agreed to that? See laflippin's post.

So you are saying that with the wild card championship on the line, bases loaded, tie game pitcher not in control, he set up a pitch down the pike with bases loaded....why because that is what YOU think that is what he did?

Did anyone else see it that way?

Gingerbread throws a right and a left. Then he throws one straight down the middle! Oh that was a low blow. DOWN GOES TPM... DOWN GOES TPM... DOWN GOES TPM.

TPM staggers to her feet. She looks hurt! Hold on, Gingerbread comes in for the kill, but TPM blocks his punch and counters with a left-right combination. Another left - right - left. She has Gingerbread against the ropes and now he's in trouble. TPM smells blood as she dances around throwing punches from every angle. TPM throws a haymaker from her hip and Gingerbread goes down in a heap. Referee "Stats" starts the count... 1... 2... 3... 4... 5... 6... 7... 8... 9... DING DING DING! Gingerbread is saved by the bell.

The corner is now working on Gingerbread. They want to throw in the towel. Gingerbread is arguing with them... wait now he takes a swing at his manager while shouting that he is still going to win this fight.

Round 4 should be a doozy!

PG, as for me, I'm just observing but I'm making an absolute KILLING on the bets!

.. Round 4 starts.. both contenders have taken off their gloves and are wielding wood bats and sharpened spikes! This is getting UGLY!

(9-5 on GBM anyone?)

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
Oh, and about arm slots- that is another battle- one I already won. You keep trying to slide in misinformation on issues like that. They already gave me the TKO! That bout is old news.

Roflmao. Really, show us where everyone agreed to that? See laflippin's post.

So you are saying that with the wild card championship on the line, bases loaded, tie game pitcher not in control, he set up a pitch down the pike with bases loaded....why because that is what YOU think that is what he did?

Did anyone else see it that way?

I can't argue the facts. The facts are that McCann set up several times with a fastball location right down the middle. Kimbrel was struggling to even find the strike zone. McCann was just doing what any "good" catcher would do in this situation- set up a location down the middle and hope he comes close. Sorry if that hurts your feelings....but it is the truth.

Just because a pro catcher sets up in the middle doesn't mean the pitch is to the middle. They throw at shoulders, knees, whatever.

No one can tell me that there are not instances where even in the big leagues a catcher sets up in the middle and "wants" it in that area for a strike.

You cannot defend walks.

Great post. Although mud wrestling might be a better analogy.

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
Gingerbread throws a right and a left. Then he throws one straight down the middle! Oh that was a low blow. DOWN GOES TPM... DOWN GOES TPM... DOWN GOES TPM.

TPM staggers to her feet. She looks hurt! Hold on, Gingerbread comes in for the kill, but TPM blocks his punch and counters with a left-right combination. Another left - right - left. She has Gingerbread against the ropes and now he's in trouble. TPM smells blood as she dances around throwing punches from every angle. TPM throws a haymaker from her hip and Gingerbread goes down in a heap. Referee "Stats" starts the count... 1... 2... 3... 4... 5... 6... 7... 8... 9... DING DING DING! Gingerbread is saved by the bell.

The corner is now working on Gingerbread. They want to throw in the towel. Gingerbread is arguing with them... wait now he takes a swing at his manager while shouting that he is still going to win this fight.

Round 4 should be a doozy!

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

I have seen DK throw one down the middle on occasion, at 96,97 most likely you will produce a swing and a miss, and that would be his out pitch on a 3-2 count, ONLY.

I never stated that a pitcher should not at anytime throw a FB down the middle of the plate the above was my first post, so you need to take it up with anyone who said that pitchers don't throw down the middle, but I imagine most likely they won't be back because dealing with you is...well, I can't put it into words really.

While I am assuming you may be using the odds that the hitter will not swing on a 3-0, the pitcher now just put one on base and you yourself just stated that you cannot defend walks. Also, if on a 3-0 down the middle produces runs, the pitcher gets charged against him NOT the catcher. Maybe I am missing something. It may very well be that he had to get the pitcher focused, but honestly you originally indicated that this is something that is done often (that's why you practice it in bullpens). Do you practice it because you see it done in ML or is this something that happens often in HS? I mean I am going to assume that in HS or college, if a pitcher is at that point, he should have been pulled a while back, he is NOT getting paid for this job.
Bases loaded 3-0 count the pitcher is in a real jam , and doing what you suggested, IMO is not what every catcher would call for (down the middle). As explained to me from a groundball pitcher, the best option would have been to produce a ground ball for the out. Maybe for a pitcher with a better off speed too that would work for them. Keep in mind that Kimbrel has TWO pitches he can rely on, so his choices pretty much were limited that day, and though it appears that the catcher set up in the middle often for a FB down the middle, you may think it appears that way and that is probably not what he was really looking for. If you are a pitcher with 3,4,5 pitches, the catcher won't be asking for a FB down the middle in that suituation. This is where infielddad's post was refering to about every situation, every pitcher being different.

Again I asked others here what they may have seen and they didn't respond or contribute, only some stupid stuff they may find amusing, which I don't, really.

Best at this time to either throw in the towel or to argue this point somewhere else, I am not here for anyone's amusement, and neither should GBM.

quote:

You cannot defend walks.

No, but in most instances, its far better than an extra base hit!

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

I have seen DK throw one down the middle on occasion, at 96,97 most likely you will produce a swing and a miss, and that would be his out pitch on a 3-2 count, ONLY.

I never stated that a pitcher should not at anytime throw a FB down the middle of the plate the above was my first post, so you need to take it up with anyone who said that pitchers don't throw down the middle, but I imagine most likely they won't be back because dealing with you is...well, I can't put it into words really.

While I am assuming you may be using the odds that the hitter will not swing on a 3-0, the pitcher now just put one on base and you yourself just stated that you cannot defend walks. Also, if on a 3-0 down the middle produces runs, the pitcher gets charged against him NOT the catcher. Maybe I am missing something. It may very well be that he had to get the pitcher focused, but honestly you originally indicated that this is something that is done often (that's why you practice it in bullpens). Do you practice it because you see it done in ML or is this something that happens often in HS? I mean I am going to assume that in HS or college, if a pitcher is at that point, he should have been pulled a while back, he is NOT getting paid for this job.
Bases loaded 3-0 count the pitcher is in a real jam , and doing what you suggested, IMO is not what every catcher would call for (down the middle). As explained to me from a groundball pitcher, the best option would have been to produce a ground ball for the out. Maybe for a pitcher with a better off speed too that would work for them. Keep in mind that Kimbrel has TWO pitches he can rely on, so his choices pretty much were limited that day, and though it appears that the catcher set up in the middle often for a FB down the middle, you may think it appears that way and that is probably not what he was really looking for. If you are a pitcher with 3,4,5 pitches, the catcher won't be asking for a FB down the middle in that suituation. This is where infielddad's post was refering to about every situation, every pitcher being different.

Again I asked others here what they may have seen and they didn't respond or contribute, only some stupid stuff they may find amusing, which I don't, really.

Best at this time to either throw in the towel or to argue this point somewhere else, I am not here for anyone's amusement, and neither should GBM.

Throw in the towel? This whole mess was brought up by JH and yet he has found no ground to stand on. He probably realized that there are times when a pitcher throws fastballs down the middle- even in the big leagues! I honestly think that just beacuse you saw GBM posting that you had to have your negative two cents thrown in.

Look, I don't really want to argue all of the myriad situations where a catcher may call for a fastball downt he middle. This whole dialogue about throwing down the middle was about whether or not a pitcher should throw down the middle either in practice (bullpens) or in games. JH, using his credentials and experience states that he has never seen anyone do that. I proved that idea false, and yet now- he is no longer debating.

As far as I am concerned, this debate is over- pitchers and catchers alike do have situations where they throw a fastball down the middle. As for HS ball, I will continue to have kids throw bullpens and at some point in that bullpen ask them to throw down the middle. So, as far as I am concerned, if you have any beef with that, then we can discuss, otherwise this debate is over- we have gone far beyond beating the dead horse on this one.

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:

No, but in most instances, its far better than an extra base hit!

Really? How many XBHs have scored compared to the number of free passes? I don’t know the answer, do you?

And how many XBHs have been snatched away by a good fielding play? Once a player is walked or hit, there’s no fielding play in the world good enough to put him out before he touches 1st base.

Sorry for the poor attempt at humor… Just trying to have some fun and lighten things up a bit. My mistake! I’ve learned my lesson.

Seriously, I would like to know what is so important regarding who is right or wrong regarding this topic? Is there some potentially harmful information or opinions being released?

Think about this... There has never been a pitcher, (even the greatest Batting practice pitchers) who can throw every pitch down the middle. Anyone want to argue that point?

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:

quote:

You cannot defend walks.

No, but in most instances, its far better than an extra base hit!

That's extreme optimism and in reality- just bad philosophy. In most instances, throwing strikes is far better than walking- that's the correct language. Sure, you have your instances where you have 1st base open with a power hitter up to bat and so an intentional pass isn't a bad thing, even perhaps pitching him with balls that hopefully he will chase and walking him isn't so bad. But, that is not "most instances". For the majority of instances, the last option for a pitcher is to walk the batter. In order to not walk the batter, he must throw pitches that induce strikes or induce a ball put into play.

I am not sure exactly what the odds are, but i am betting that batters who get walked are far more likely to end up scoring than batters who don't get walked.

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
Sorry for the poor attempt at humor… Just trying to have some fun and lighten things up a bit. My mistake! I’ve learned my lesson.

Seriously, I would like to know what is so important regarding who is right or wrong regarding this topic? Is there some potentially harmful information or opinions being released?

Think about this... There has never been a pitcher, (even the greatest Batting practice pitchers) who can throw every pitch down the middle. Anyone want to argue that point?

I actually am enjoying the sideshowing of the boxing match scenerio.

This all got me to thinking the past few days about something-

I wonder what the actual percentage is of all balls thrown in the big leagues that end up down the middle of the plate (not necessarily of where the catcher was set up) that do not get hit into a base hit? I watch a lot of baseball and see a lot of pitches that end up right over the heart of the strike zone that are either fouled off or taken for a strike or being hit into an out. I see a lot of base hits on the other hand where the pitch was not right down the middle. I am betting that the percentage would probably be less than 10-20%. Also, what is the actual percentage of a pitcher to hit a location right down the middle or any location exactly? I am guessing that even in the big leagues it is less than 50-60% of the time. If we combine these two stats or percentages, what would be the odds of a batter hitting a pitch where the catcher sets up for the fastball right down the middle?

I ask this also in light that on our HS team we have a pitcher who just throws fastballs and can get wild sometimes. He gets a lot of movement from a Randy Johnson type of delivery and arm slot. The catcher almost always gives him a target right down the middle even though it seldom goes right down the middle. We do this because it gives him the best target for getting the pitch somehwere in or near the strike zone- the batter meanwhile, still has to try to hit it, put it into play, and then score in front of 9 defensive players on the field.

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:

No, but in most instances, its far better than an extra base hit!

Really? How many XBHs have scored compared to the number of free passes? I don’t know the answer, do you?

And how many XBHs have been snatched away by a good fielding play? Once a player is walked or hit, there’s no fielding play in the world good enough to put him out before he touches 1st base.

The fact that an extra base hit equates to more than one base, how can you logically say it's NOT better than a base on balls. The reasoning of being snatched away by a fielder is inane! It's a hit- not a hard-hit ball! If your reasoning is that there might be an out recorded- well, another inane thought.

Guess what? Plenty of professional catchers line up down the middle for the same reason- guys have movement and lack command. It's not so they will throw down the middle.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
Sorry for the poor attempt at humor… Just trying to have some fun and lighten things up a bit. My mistake! I’ve learned my lesson.

Seriously, I would like to know what is so important regarding who is right or wrong regarding this topic? Is there some potentially harmful information or opinions being released?

Think about this... There has never been a pitcher, (even the greatest Batting practice pitchers) who can throw every pitch down the middle. Anyone want to argue that point?

I actually am enjoying the sideshowing of the boxing match scenerio.

This all got me to thinking the past few days about something-

I wonder what the actual percentage is of all balls thrown in the big leagues that end up down the middle of the plate (not necessarily of where the catcher was set up) that do not get hit into a base hit? I watch a lot of baseball and see a lot of pitches that end up right over the heart of the strike zone that are either fouled off or taken for a strike or being hit into an out. I see a lot of base hits on the other hand where the pitch was not right down the middle. I am betting that the percentage would probably be less than 10-20%. Also, what is the actual percentage of a pitcher to hit a location right down the middle or any location exactly? I am guessing that even in the big leagues it is less than 50-60% of the time. If we combine these two stats or percentages, what would be the odds of a batter hitting a pitch where the catcher sets up for the fastball right down the middle?

I ask this also in light that on our HS team we have a pitcher who just throws fastballs and can get wild sometimes. He gets a lot of movement from a Randy Johnson type of delivery and arm slot. The catcher almost always gives him a target right down the middle even though it seldom goes right down the middle. We do this because it gives him the best target for getting the pitch somehwere in or near the strike zone- the batter meanwhile, still has to try to hit it, put it into play, and then score in front of 9 defensive players on the field.

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
Sorry for the poor attempt at humor… Just trying to have some fun and lighten things up a bit. My mistake! I’ve learned my lesson.

Seriously, I would like to know what is so important regarding who is right or wrong regarding this topic? Is there some potentially harmful information or opinions being released?

Think about this... There has never been a pitcher, (even the greatest Batting practice pitchers) who can throw every pitch down the middle. Anyone want to argue that point?

I thought it was funny, and did lighten up the thread, so no apologies needed. I posted on the first page when the discussion was centered around bullpens. I chose to be a spectator in this Fight after it was apparent that things were heating up and it would come down to a draw.

So, this discussion/debate/fight has been dominated by 3-0 pitch location. How about location when you're ahead in the count? Nobody has mentioned the fact that Papelbon grooved a 1-2 pitch down the middle to give up the game winning hit, and I believe that Dan Johnson of the Rays was in the hole 1-2 when he stayed back on a changeup that was left up in the zone and deposited in the RF seats to tie the game Wednesday night? I'm going to lunch...just something to think about?

I'm right there with you bsbl247. I was the first to respond to this post and have sat back with amazement at what has wound up happening with it. I will say it has brought on a certain degree of entertainment. No appologies necessary PG.

I will say this. I'm not different than most on here. Dad of a pitcher. I also pay close attention to what happens in MLB games I watch. My observation is that a VERY high percentage of the pitches that are hit hard by batters are pitches that have been left over the middle of the plate and are up in the zone (ie. mistakes). And when I say up in the zone, I am talking maybe 4 inches above the knees. Hitters are rediculously good in MLB, so they will hit good, pitcher's pitches as well and you just have to tip your hat. But most of the time, the hardest hits are on "mistakes". I live outside of Atlanta, so I follow the Braves. Tim Hudson has generally pitched very well this year. A couple of times he hasn't, he has gotten shelled in those outings. Hudson has a ton of tail on his fastball. When he got shelled, his fastball was tailing right back to the heart of the plate and above the knees. That is trouble.

I will say that there probably are times that you want your catcher to set up down the middle. However, that is so that a pitcher having control problems has a better chance of getting the ball over the plate. I don't believe it is because the catcher or the pitcher wants the ball to travel right down the middle of the plate, belt high. Then you are looking at 4 runs instead of 1. Even if a catcher sets up down the middle, I'm sure he would prefer that the pitch comes in at knee level. Bring it in 3 or 4 inches over that and the ball will likely get hammered.

So, in terms of this thread and what it has turned into, a catcher (McCann) may set up down the middle at times, but that does not necessarily mean that he wants the pitch to BE right down the middle. To use the argument that MLB pitchers want to throw the ball "right down the pipe" because that is where the catcher is set up really doesn't hold water. A struggling pitcher will simply have more room for error if he is targeting down the middle. I think when a guy is struggling, he will shoot for down the middle and hope it doesn't go there.

quote:

Originally posted by bballman:
I'm right there with you bsbl247. I was the first to respond to this post and have sat back with amazement at what has wound up happening with it. I will say it has brought on a certain degree of entertainment. No appologies necessary PG.

I will say this. I'm not different than most on here. Dad of a pitcher. I also pay close attention to what happens in MLB games I watch. My observation is that a VERY high percentage of the pitches that are hit hard by batters are pitches that have been left over the middle of the plate and are up in the zone (ie. mistakes). And when I say up in the zone, I am talking maybe 4 inches above the knees. Hitters are rediculously good in MLB, so they will hit good, pitcher's pitches as well and you just have to tip your hat. But most of the time, the hardest hits are on "mistakes". I live outside of Atlanta, so I follow the Braves. Tim Hudson has generally pitched very well this year. A couple of times he hasn't, he has gotten shelled in those outings. Hudson has a ton of tail on his fastball. When he got shelled, his fastball was tailing right back to the heart of the plate and above the knees. That is trouble.

I will say that there probably are times that you want your catcher to set up down the middle. However, that is so that a pitcher having control problems has a better chance of getting the ball over the plate. I don't believe it is because the catcher or the pitcher wants the ball to travel right down the middle of the plate, belt high. Then you are looking at 4 runs instead of 1. Even if a catcher sets up down the middle, I'm sure he would prefer that the pitch comes in at knee level. Bring it in 3 or 4 inches over that and the ball will likely get hammered.

So, in terms of this thread and what it has turned into, a catcher (McCann) may set up down the middle at times, but that does not necessarily mean that he wants the pitch to BE right down the middle. To use the argument that MLB pitchers want to throw the ball "right down the pipe" because that is where the catcher is set up really doesn't hold water. A struggling pitcher will simply have more room for error if he is targeting down the middle. I think when a guy is struggling, he will shoot for down the middle and hope it doesn't go there.

I vote we all agree with this post and call it good

Do I get any part of the purse for starting the thread? Thanks for the advice. The cool thing about this site is you can start a thread for a specific reason and sometimes it takes on a life of its own and creates and answers new questions.

Bum rush??? The corner men are going crazy. Both fighters are punch-drunk.

Looks like they couldn't go the distance.

Who gets the belt?

The boxing commission may have to make a ruling.



Stand by, folks. You may have just witnessed the greatest fight of all time.

If a pitcher could throw 87% strikes, then there are no randomly generated walks. This even assumes the hitter not swinging.If interested I'll show you the math.

A bullpen is a bad place to measure strike % if they are working on their game. They may be working on timing, rhythm, grips, etc. I would expect less strikes in practice.

A long time ago the Yankees were preparing for a game and there was a hitter on the other team they couldn't get out in previous games. Yogi told the pitcher just to throw it down the middle and don't waste pitch count on him. He popped the first pitch out to second.

A pitcher would be foolish not to try to throw some pitches down the middle. Your examples of avoiding the middle are to power hitters. If you have a hitter who has little power and a high swing contact ratio, I think live in the middle especially early in the count.

Only 7 to 8% of plate appearances result in a walk in MLB. 33% of all hits in the majors are extra base hits. I would think a lot of these are middle or up in the zone. All pitchers miss, they all have a tendency of where they miss. Even in high school those who miss up in the strike zone don't tend to last. Those who miss low last longer.

The power hitters walk more than those with little power because a pitcher should avoid the middle, middle pitch to them. Once a power hitter learns to walk, they are very dangerous. You would have to go to the middle against the other hitters or you will lose.

The middle pitch to a low power high contact hitter results in low pitch count. Low pitch keeps the starter out longer.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:

quote:

You cannot defend walks.

No, but in most instances, its far better than an extra base hit!

That's extreme optimism and in reality- just bad philosophy. In most instances, throwing strikes is far better than walking- that's the correct language. Sure, you have your instances where you have 1st base open with a power hitter up to bat and so an intentional pass isn't a bad thing, even perhaps pitching him with balls that hopefully he will chase and walking him isn't so bad. But, that is not "most instances". For the majority of instances, the last option for a pitcher is to walk the batter. In order to not walk the batter, he must throw pitches that induce strikes or induce a ball put into play.

I am not sure exactly what the odds are, but i am betting that batters who get walked are far more likely to end up scoring than batters who don't get walked.

That is not the question in this case. The correct question is:
Are batters that get walked far more likely to score than those who hit extra base hits?

And the answer will not be surface-simple. For example, if the pitcher walks two in a row is he having control issues? Does he groove one to the 3rd hitter to keep from walking yet another one? Does that bring in the runs.

I hate walks from my pitchers. When I was younger I was known for pulling a pitcher that walked a lead off hitter in the 1st. But grooving one and giving up a double with two on doesn't really give me a chance to go talk to him or pull him before we are down two does it.

Nothing is as simple as it is being made to sound. And that's because baseball is as much art as it is science.

CJ Wilson pitched the worse game of his career yesterday. What happened? Why did Wash leave him in? Where did the runs come from?

quote:

Originally posted by CDP:
The fact that an extra base hit equates to more than one base, how can you logically say it's NOT better than a base on balls. The reasoning of being snatched away by a fielder is inane! It's a hit- not a hard-hit ball! If your reasoning is that there might be an out recorded- well, another inane thought.

Is 1 XBH better than 1 BB or HBP? Yes, in the sense that its not only worth 2 bases, but if there were runners on, they will likely move up too. But, any ball put in play that doesn’t go out of the park can be turned into an out, and many times its only a matter of feet or inches that allows it to be one thing or another, but that’s never true for a B or HBP.

The reasoning may be inane to you, but that doesn’t make it faulty.

Most people understand that a hit has a hefty component of luck in it. That’s not true for free passes because there’s no chance what-so-ever to put that batter out. What’s so hard to understand about that? They’re called FREE PASSES because the offense isn’t made to do any work, and the defense can only watch the runners trot to 1st. IOW, 100% of ball 4’s allow the batter to reach 1st safely. What percentage of balls in play allow the batter to do the same?

quote:

I am not sure exactly what the odds are, but i am betting that batters who get walked are far more likely to end up scoring than batters who don't get walked.

Interesting thought. But then are you suggesting that, for example, a lead off base runner is statistically more likely to score if he reached base via a walk than a base hit?

Back to the situation that led to much of this debate.

The bases were not loaded for Hunter Pence. There were runners at 1B and 2B, the tying run had just scored from 3B on a sac fly. Pence is a very good hitter. The next hitter is the weakest hitter (excluding pitcher) on the Phillies roster. Not really a power factor and hitting under .200 for the Phillies. After Pence walked to load the bases the inning ended on a weak foul pop out.

In the above situation, you could throw a 3-0 fastball down the middle and maybe Pence won't swing, foul it off, or will hit it at someone. If he doesn't swing, or fouls one off, the count goes to 3-1 with same weak hitter on deck.

In this situation, you would have to think Pence has the green light at 3-0. In fact, I don't think the Braves wanted to throw any pitch in any count down the middle to Pence in that situation... The winning run on 2B with 2 outs with a very good hitter at the plate and the weakest hitter up next.

Even if Kimbrel had perfect control at the time, he would have not wanted Pence to beat him. He would have tried to pitch around him (get him to chase) in that situation.

That said... Catchers set up right down the middle a lot! Pretty much every catcher with every pitcher.

And BTW the Phillies catcher just sat up on the outside for a great pitcher (Halladay). The pitch missed and Berkman hit it out on the inner half. As good as Halladay is, watch how often the catcher will set up right down the middle. Also notice how often Halladay throws it somewhere else.

Not to start another argument, but of course there are situations where pitchers will want to throw strikes, even if they are down the middle. Especially when they are down in the count. Everyone knows there are situations where the walk and the extra base hit, even a homerun are equal. I would be glad to give examples, if it's needed.

Someone early on mentioned that everything is based on the situation. Very true... but I guess that was just too simple.

This thread didn't seem like anything worth name calling or arguing about. Guess that's why I attempted and "failed" at trying to add a little humor.

quote:

CJ Wilson pitched the worse game of his career yesterday. What happened? Why did Wash leave him in? Where did the runs come from?

Extra base hits are always problematic for a pitcher. Walks are only a problem when followed by extra base hits!

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:

quote:

CJ Wilson pitched the worse game of his career yesterday. What happened? Why did Wash leave him in? Where did the runs come from?

Extra base hits are always problematic for a pitcher. Walks are only a problem when followed by extra base hits!

I lost count of the number of 3-1 counts. And then the catcher set up in the middle and voila!

quote:

Originally posted by NDD:
I lost count of the number of 3-1 counts. And then the catcher set up in the middle and voila!

My program doesn’t track 3-1 counts during the game, but it does track 3 ball counts, as well as 0-2 counts. It also track quite a few other things people have seldom seen before, and I can tell you this, that game was pretty ugly in a lot of ways. Not only that, what the numbers showed as the game was going on, was very often a far cry from what the announcers were saying.

Time to pick up the Detroit/NY game!

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:

quote:

I am not sure exactly what the odds are, but i am betting that batters who get walked are far more likely to end up scoring than batters who don't get walked.

Interesting thought. But then are you suggesting that, for example, a lead off base runner is statistically more likely to score if he reached base via a walk than a base hit?

Suppose you had iny of these counts- a 3-0, 3-1 or a 3-2 count, the batter has better odds of scoring if he gets walked versus either striking out, or putting the ball into play in this situation. We give batters way too much credit at the cost of giving up walks that in up coming around to score more often than we think. It's a type of mentality and approach we often overlook I guess. A pitcher who gets in this count situation is thus better off throwing strikes and challenging the batter rather than giving in and walking him. A base on balls is in essence- a perfect hit- it means the same thing- it puts a runner on that is thus that much closer to getting home and scoring.

Looks like the commission restarted the bout.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
Suppose you had iny of these counts- a 3-0, 3-1 or a 3-2 count, the batter has better odds of scoring if he gets walked versus either striking out, or putting the ball into play in this situation. We give batters way too much credit at the cost of giving up walks that in up coming around to score more often than we think. It's a type of mentality and approach we often overlook I guess. A pitcher who gets in this count situation is thus better off throwing strikes and challenging the batter rather than giving in and walking him. A base on balls is in essence- a perfect hit- it means the same thing- it puts a runner on that is thus that much closer to getting home and scoring.

In the 5 years of our local HS team’s existence, we’ve gotten 816 free passes and 366 have scored. That’s a rate of almost 45%. In that same period of time, we’ve gotten 1,205 hits and 582 have scored. That’s a shade over 48%. That shows a player getting at hit is about 3% more likely to score than a player who walks, but of the 1,080 runs we’ve scored, almost 34% reached base by a free pass.

Meanwhile, out pitchers have given up 831 hits, and 322 of them have scored for a percentage of almost 39%. Our pitchers have given up 552 free passes and 153 have scored for a percentage of a smidge under 28%. Of the 554 runs we’ve given up, just under 28% came from the batter reaching on a free pass. Who do you think was more successful, us or our opponents?

Of course the optimum thing a pitcher can do is ether strike out every hitter, or have them foul out. That way there’s almost no chance of them reaching base safely. Putting the ball in play gives players a chance to reach, but it isn’t a sure bet. But if a pitcher walks or hits a batter, it’s a guaranteed runner on 1st.

There's a high degree of correlation between high- strikeout pitchers and high-walk pitchers. This is not necessarily a control issue but rather the pitcher working the corners and using different pitches out of the zone attempting to get misses.

In fact, in sabermetrics, this correlation is the statistic "PFR", or power-finesse ratio.

Pitchers with high PFR numbers, the theory goes, have a higher degree of control over the outcome of the game.

quote:

Originally posted by Bum:
There's a high degree of correlation between high- strikeout pitchers and high-walk pitchers. This is not necessarily a control issue but rather the pitcher working the corners and using different pitches out of the zone attempting to get misses.

In fact, in sabermetrics, this correlation is the statistic "PFR", or power-finesse ratio. [/QUOTE]

Actually, there’s an algorithm used to compute whether a pitcher is a power or a finesse pitcher. If a pitcher WALKs or Ks 28% or more of the batters he faces, he’s considered to be a power pitcher. If he WALKs or Ks less than 24%, he’s considered a finesse pitcher.

Since a pitcher can be considered a power pitcher without ever getting a K, my guess is, the realization is that pitcher who throw hard are also wilder.

quote:

Pitchers with high PFR numbers, the theory goes, have a higher degree of control over the outcome of the game.

I’ve never heard of a theory like that. Could you provide a link so I could read up on it?

Here is a succint definition of the power finesse ratio:

Definition of Power Finesse Ratio

Keep in mind when looking at the pitchers the link is dated from 2008.

Now Stats, let me remind you of something. "Theories" are just that. You can either believe it or not. If you choose not to believe it, good for you. But that doesn't mean you're right. Some don't believe in the theory of evolution, but I certainly wouldn't want to challenge their belief system.

Before you issue continual challenges I suggest you disclose exactly what role you play for your team and at what level. Are you a h.s. coach? College coach? Former player? Dad of a player? Just trying to understand where you're coming from.

Me, I'm just the dad of a player who would not dare challenge your apparent masterful insight into the mechanics of the game.

But for me to bow to my master, I need some credentials.

quote:

Originally posted by Bum:
Here is a succint definition of the power finesse ratio:

Definition of Power Finesse Ratio

Keep in mind when looking at the pitchers the link is dated from 2008.

Using a 4 year old article from a fantasy source to support a position is ok, but a little weak.

quote:

Now Stats, let me remind you of something. "Theories" are just that. You can either believe it or not. If you choose not to believe it, good for you. But that doesn't mean you're right. Some don't believe in the theory of evolution, but I certainly wouldn't want to challenge their belief system.

You’re getting defensive not because I said that theory was BS, but because I only asked to see it. Evidently it comes from that article, and its become what you believe. It sounds good on its face, but seeing only 20 ML pitchers out of the thousands who have pitched, doesn’t make for a sound theory to me.

quote:

Before you issue continual challenges I suggest you disclose exactly what role you play for your team and at what level. Are you a h.s. coach? College coach? Former player? Dad of a player? Just trying to understand where you're coming from.

Why? Judge me on what I say and ask, or don’t judge me at all. What is it that I’ve said that is a blatant lie.

quote:

Me, I'm just the dad of a player who would not dare challenge your apparent masterful insight into the mechanics of the game.

But for me to bow to my master, I need some credentials.

You don’t need to be condescending. It comes across as childish and churlish. Look, you have a choice here. You can ignore challenges to whatever it is you’ve chosen to say in a forum like this, or you can present arguments to support yourself. But to stick out your tongue and issue veiled insults is silly.

So what is it I’ve said that has your panties in a bunch? Is it that I said power pitchers are wilder than finesse pitchers? Or maybe its that I actually have numbers to check to see if I can check some of the things people say. Or could it be that I say walks and hit batters are a very bad thing from a pitcher’s perspective?

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:
So what is it I’ve said that has your panties in a bunch?

Well you're going to need Dependz, because I detect one load of BS coming out of you.

quote:

Originally posted by Bum:
Well you're going to need Dependz, because I detect one load of BS coming out of you.

You act a lot like a little child on the playground who just got embarrassed by something someone said, and now is hollering “Liar, Liar, pants on fire!”

Man up and be specific. If you think I’m lying about something, please say what it is, give some supporting evidence to refute it, and give me a chance to respond. I’ll repeat these 3 in case you’ve forgotten, or please list anything else.

Is it that I said power pitchers are wilder than finesse pitchers? Or maybe its that I actually have numbers to check to see if I can check some of the things people say. Or could it be that I say walks and hit batters are a very bad thing from a pitcher’s perspective?

Getting back from WWBI (World War Baseball I) to the original post by IEBSBL as far as how he is charting his pitchers bullpens. I just got back from visiting my son this weekend and glanced over his throwing program and bullpen charts and this is how they have their early bullpen charting organized.

They break their pitchers into groups and usually two throw together and one charts for the other one. They each throw three particular pitches in a row IE; glove side FB, arm side FB, CU, etc and then switch. They have pitch types up the left column, and little boxes horizontal across the page with a slant line drawn between to determine if they “hit their spots or not + was it a quality pitch”. When they are throwing their bull pen, they shade the upper square if “yes” and lower square if “no”. This gives them a single piece of paper that they can glance at to see which pitch they need to work on, or if there is a trend that develops over the long term.

Over time what happens is they get little triangles that are shaded going left to right across the paper on each pitch type, so the player gets a visual idea on what he needs to be working on (and coach can pick up and quickly see). Trends are easily identified without having to calculate % or mess around too much. It looks like a easy simple program that could be implemented without getting too complicated. It pairs up pitchers that they will switch around as the fall season goes on and they each talk about what works for him so there is also this cross pollination between the pitchers on how they are successful with specific pitches.

There is a bit of subjectivity still, for example: my son was saying that although he had some lower squares shaded vs his new throwing partner last week, he was able to hit his corners better than the other pitcher, so his “yes” pitches were on the black more and even though in theory he was missing off the plate on some of his FB, he has been happy with his outings since he was hitting tighter groupings on the edges. He felt that even though his partner had a better looking sheet, his grouping was tighter and were on the corners more.

Just an example on how another college program is charting and the subjectivity involved. FWIW.

Y’all can get back to round 7 if you wish.

Wow. It's a tag team bout!

Just sticking my head out of the foxhole for a moment - but verlander just threw 2 cbs right down the middle to ARod who didn't even twitch. Now, verlander may have missed his spot or maybe not. I think that there are general rules (e.g., don't groove a ball down the middle); exceptions to the general rule (e.g., throw a ball down the middle if you can fool the batter; or if you want to get an out on a sacrifice); exceptions to the exceptions, etc.

I think it shows that baseball is a thinking man's game; a game of constant adjustments; a game that is much "faster" then the non-baseball fan could ever imagine. A game which presents lots of cliches (e.g., he really grooved that pitch) for every occasion (e.g., he blew that high cheese right past him) all of which prove any point a fan wants to make.

I think the bottom line for a pitcher is throw whatever and wherever you need to get the batter out.

goosegg,

I watched that A-Rod AB and took note of the pitch sequence. I believe the first breaking ball was at 87MPH and he followed that up with an 88MPH bender. So he had Rodriguez 0-2 and comes in with 100MPH cheese that just misses low and inside...#13 was probably looking for another upper 80's bender, but instead, he got a 97-98MPH FB at the knees on the inside corner for a called strike three....Yes, those first two breaking balls were over the heart of the plate, but they certainly weren't grooved...Verlander is Nasty!

....now the next AB that A-Rod had versus Verlander matches this thread perfectly. The Right Hander fell behind 3-0. Pitch number four to A-Rod that AB was 100MPH Cheese, he took it. Again at 3-1, the pitch was 100MPH, and Rodriguez took it for strike two. Next pitch breaking ball? Nope...he throws a 3-2 101MPH FB that A-Rod just missed, and fouled it straight back. A-Rod appeared to have his timing down, so why not throw a bender? Heck No, he comes back with more 100MPH Gas that misses upstairs for ball four.

The moral of this story? If you can throw 100MPH after 110+ pitches in the 8th inning, then you don't need to worry about hitting your spots quite as much as your everyday normal pitcher....emphasis on quite as much!

Bsbl247, you hit the nail on the head. That is why all these statistics drawn at the h.s. level are meaningless.

How many h.s. hitters can hit a 90 mph fastball? Truth is, not many. The need to locate is meaningless for a hard thrower in h.s. Bum, Jr. was pretty much striking everyone out in h.s. but at the next level it takes more than that.

Unless you throw 95 in college you need to locate and have offspeed pitches. Those that are high-percentage strike guys better be ground ball pitchers and those that are high strikeout guys better have three pitches and/or a dominate fastball, know how to work out of the zone, and work around walks. Because the walks will come when you're working around bats.

Thus the correlation between strikeouts and walks.

These guys running stats at the h.s. level don't get that because they're working with average h.s. pitchers and balls in play, not thoroughbeds who don't let balls go into play.

quote:

Originally posted by Bum:

Unless you throw 95 in college you need to locate and have offspeed pitches. Those that are high-percentage strike guys better be ground ball pitchers and those that are high strikeout guys better have three pitches and/or a dominate fastball, know how to work out of the zone, and work around walks. Because the walks will come when you're working around bats.

I agree with you Bum. Watching that game last night, it is truly amazing how those pitchers lived at the edges of the strike zone. Almost no pitches grooved down the middle. At least not fastballs. Not a ton of hitters are going to swing at a CB with less than 2 strikes, unless it's a hanger or unless they are fooled. They are generally looking for the fastball. A CB down the middle with no K's is usually pretty safe. However, even that wasn't done a whole lot.

When Verlander gave up 2 in the 7th, he had runners on 1st & 2nd, 3-2 count and threw one down the middle. It was the only pitch down the middle and the batter hit a 2 run double. I think it was a mistake he left over, but I couldn't be sure. Point is, it really is amazing how those guys live on the edge of the K zone.

I also noticed how important it is to hit your spot. I saw many times where the pitcher would throw one out of the zone and get the strike called when he hit the catcher's glove. Then miss his spot, in the strike zone, and it was called a ball because the catcher had to reach for it. These guys are good.

Well, I’ve been thinking about losing my composure and making a post that was really beneath me, or at least my opinion of myself. With that in mind, even though I feel very passionately that I’m on the correct side of this discussion, I’m removing my last post, and I offer my apologies to Bum.

do we really need alol these statistics?

quote:

Originally posted by bballman:
I agree with you Bum. Watching that game last night, it is truly amazing how those pitchers lived at the edges of the strike zone. Almost no pitches grooved down the middle. At least not fastballs. Not a ton of hitters are going to swing at a CB with less than 2 strikes, unless it's a hanger or unless they are fooled. They are generally looking for the fastball. A CB down the middle with no K's is usually pretty safe. However, even that wasn't done a whole lot.

When Verlander gave up 2 in the 7th, he had runners on 1st & 2nd, 3-2 count and threw one down the middle. It was the only pitch down the middle and the batter hit a 2 run double. I think it was a mistake he left over, but I couldn't be sure. Point is, it really is amazing how those guys live on the edge of the K zone.

I also noticed how important it is to hit your spot. I saw many times where the pitcher would throw one out of the zone and get the strike called when he hit the catcher's glove. Then miss his spot, in the strike zone, and it was called a ball because the catcher had to reach for it. These guys are good.

That was a mistake made by Verlander, it happens.
The whole idea is to live on the inside (just) or the outside (just) of the zone.

The zone actually can be expanded by the pitcher, so that is why they need to show consistancy, which is really what it is all about. So that is why sometimes it looks like it wasn't a strike but it was given to the pitcher. In milb, first inning or two can be a battle for the zone, though some umpires don't buy into it unless the pitcher is consistant in the spot. What is tough is that for every level you move up (HS to college to pro and within pro the levels) the zone is smaller, so it's hard to measure a pitcher, I guess that is why they have all of those stats (like PFR), win losses, ERA just isn't enough these days. BTW, DK is a low PFR guy, due to being a groundball pitcher, even if what BOF posted was 4 years old, it was correct.

My son's agent is Verlander's, he explained once why he is so special. He approaches a game the SAME every time, whether it be a home game, away game, championship game that's why he is so consistant at what he does. He practices what they call sameness. It is NOT easy to do, but those pitchers that consistantly strive for that, do well. Of course having a FB hit 101 doesn't hurt.

BTW, when I texted Mike to tell him that he is the man (Verlander), his response was (along with reminding me about sameness) that all numbers are different and confusing so most of it should be ignored.

That might give you an idea how really important all of it is (not).

Baseball is a game of numbers and stats, that's why they are important, but that doesn't mean that they mean that much to the player.

To answer TR's question, I suppose that they are needed for record's sake.

Stats,
Good idea about removing that post.

+

TPM, I agree, you can pretty much make numbers look any way you want. However, on many batters, I noticed that they were pitched in a very specific way. Some guys were pitched almost exclusively inside, some almost exclusively outside. That strategy came from numbers and tendencies. So, the numbers can be useful in some ways in determining how to pitch a batter, or what to look for out of a pitcher.

One thing they all had in common was, the pitchers lived on the edges of the strike zone.

Once again, I will say - these guys are good.

quote:

Originally posted by bballman:
TPM, I agree, you can pretty much make numbers look any way you want. However, on many batters, I noticed that they were pitched in a very specific way. Some guys were pitched almost exclusively inside, some almost exclusively outside. That strategy came from numbers and tendencies. So, the numbers can be useful in some ways in determining how to pitch a batter, or what to look for out of a pitcher.

One thing they all had in common was, the pitchers lived on the edges of the strike zone.

Once again, I will say - these guys are good.

FWIW, mlb pitchers and hitters may spend hours watching video of their opponents, so not so sure how important numbers and stats to them really are. I think that you can learn a lot more by observing.
In many ways, you really can't compare amateur to pro, the differences are huge, in fact like us, they probably have no clue, but once players get beyond the HS game, they begin to understand what may be needed to succeed on an entirely different level. JMO.

Sultan,
I think that most of us here are really trying to keep this pretty informative and interesting, why don't you join us?

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
do we really need alol these statistics?

Like so many other things in life, one man’s trash is another man’s treasure.

But evidently someone sees value in them. Perhaps the problem is like sitting in a library full of books written in Greek, and all you can do is understand English.

Apology accepted.

Hey folks, I am jumpin back in the ring.

I honestly believe the best pitchers in the world are those who play MLB baseball. But, even at that level, I see where pitchers make the same mistakes that kids in HS make. A pitchers ability to control his stuff is generally what gets him the big leagues, or so we think. Most of it really has to do with a myriad of other factors. The truth of it is that there isn't a lot of difference with hitting locations by a good HS pitcher and a good professional pitcher. Even at the MLB level, the average (I am not speaking of the Maddux phenom) pitcher struggles continually with the location of his stuff. Often what gets them through those routine misses is his other abilities- deception, a great breaking ball or even a blazing fastball all of which can induce outs. Composure also make s big part of it.

I have watched too many MLB games over the years to realize that the pitchers in that league do battle continually with the control over the location of their stuff. Every night I watch the MLB channel and they analyze the pitchers who did good and those who didn't do good. It's a daily thing- a daily routine for those guys to show that the number 1 problem for pitchers who get hit are because of control problems. We give the average MLB pitcher too much credit for being able to control hitting locations. If they really did hit their locations consistantly, they would have nothing to analyze "every night".

Good batters make a living in the big leagues by hitting balls that miss their location. Let's be honest- when most hits happen, especially for extra base hits, it is because pitchers are missing the targeted location of what the catcher wants and has set up for. The same with walks- A batter's ability to draw a walk is almost entirely because the pitcher is having control problems with locating his pitches.

Don't get me wrong, MLB pitchers still are the best with their control over MiLB, college, and HS, but not very much! It is usually something else that makes them great at the MLB level and I believe most of that special stuff is their ability to, as the famous saying goes- "making my balls look like strikes and my strikes look like balls."

Location versus stuff is often how the game at the MLB level is played. Lincecum doesn't have great location, he has great stuff because of his deception of motion and release. Maddux on the other hand wasn't really known for his stuff but rather his ability to locate. Mixing the two together obviously makes what should be the best pitcher possible- someone who has great stuff and can locate that great stuff. But, as we saw with the braves closer, (and many closers at that) Kimbrel, his ability to locat pitches is not what got him to the big show, it was indeed his plus plus breaking ball and plus fastball- his "stuff", and not necessarily his ability to locate that stuff.

I did some interesting work tonight. I flipped back and forth between the two games tonight and kept a pitch chart of sorts. I did a random sampling of what might be the average pitcher (bullpen guys) of playoff teams in the MLB. I based my data off of either hitting their locations or not. My data was according to these guidlines-

Hitting the location: Catcher didn't move glove more than 6 inches from his initial set-up on fastballs and change-ups. On breaking balls I did it off of whether or not it induced a swing and was generally close or didn't induce a swing and was generally way off. Here is what I found-


There were a total of 156 pitches tracked. There were 34 outs recorded during that span for an average of 4.6 pitches per out. There were 7 base hits during that span which worked out to be a base hit for every 22 pitches thrown which meant that for each pitch there was a 4.5% chance of a base hit.

Of greater interest though, of the 156 pitches thrown, only 74 hit the catchers location (6 inch radius) for a percentage of 47% of hitting their location. 53% of all pitches thrown did not hit their location. This is just a small sample but it showed me that as far as pin-point control goes, even the average MLB pitcher can't do it most of the time. Most of the time he misses his location! But, of interest here are these numbers which may prove a thing or two about all this-

Of the 156 pitches thrown, 48 of them found themselves over the vicinity of the middle of the plate (31%). 31 of the 48 were pitches that hit the location the catcher gave. 2 base hits were recorded where the pitcher hit his location down the middle of the plate. That works out to be this interesting number- of the 31 intentional down the middle strikes, batters only recorded base hits at the rate of 6.4% of the time. On the flip side, of all pitches thrown, they have a 4.5% chance of recording a base hit on each pitch thrown. So, the chance of getting a base hit does increase slightly by one thrown over the middle, it doen't mean much difference overall This may seem shocking- here is the stat there- 65% of the pitches thrown down the middle of the plate were thrown to the catchers location! 48 of the 156 total pitches thrown were down the vicinity of the middle of the plate. This means that roughly 1/3 of all the pitches thrown were somehwere in the hitters hit-zone. There were 7 base hits, 5 of them coming off of balls thrown down the middle of the plate. So, of the 48 pitches thrown down the middle of the plate, 5 of them were hit. This roughly works out to be a mark of only 10% of the time balls are thrown down the middle of the plate are they hit for a base hit! On the flip side- only 2% of balls not thrown down the middle of the plate equate into base hits. So clearly one wants to miss of the plate inducing a ball hit into play versus one thrown down the middle.

Of the total outs recorded (34), 20 of them came on the pitch where the pitcher hit his location on that particular pitch. This works out to 58% of the time an out was recorded, it was on a pitch where the pitcher hit his location. This is interesting because it shows that when an out is recorded, the pitcher was 10% better at hitting his location. This may be because the pitcher focuses more deep into counts versus first or second pitch counts to batters.

My conclusions support my overall theory in some ways and miss on other points. I was somewhat amazed that in reality, pitchers can't throw to a location the majority of the time but were still good at inducing a good ratio of inducing more strikes than balls (107/49) and more outs than hits. Batters during this stretch hit only .205 all the while the pitchers were missing their locations just over half the time. During this 156 pitch stretch, I did notice that most of the pitches had "stuff", either deceiving the batter into a foolish swing, or having enough late movement to catch batters off guard. This tells me that pitchers at the MLB level make a living not because they can hit their location the majority of the time but in reality because their pitching induces lots of strikes and outs because they have good moving stuff coupled with the right velocity and deception.

This also reinforces my notion about hitters as well- Of the seven hits recorded during this stretch, 5 of them were mistake pitches that found the middle of the zone. Thus- hitters in the big leagues make a living by hitting mistakes. But it also shows that only 1 out of 10 pitches thrown down the middle actually get hit. To me this means that even though a pitcher can struggle hitting his location the majority of the time, only 10% of balls down the middle actually end up getting hit by pitchers who have "stuff".

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:
FWIW, mlb pitchers and hitters may spend hours watching video of their opponents, so not so sure how important numbers and stats to them really are. I think that you can learn a lot more by observing.

That makes sense, although I think numbers still play somewhat of a part in the process. Look at spray charts for hitters. That is just numbers vizualized. Defenses are set up based on these spray charts. I'm sure there are more examples that my unexperienced mind can't come up with now.

Not disagreeing with you TPM. I think your comment has a lot of validity. I still think numbers come into play. Certainly, more by some teams and personnel than others, but they are there.

GBM, not sure what this means but here's my own statistical analysis. Of the three homeruns given up this summer by Bum, Jr., 100% were middle-in and the catcher set up outside.

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:
Sultan,
I think that most of us here are really trying to keep this pretty informative and interesting, why don't you join us?

I am always here, all knowing, all powerful.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
…Good batters make a living in the big leagues by hitting balls that miss their location.

How do you or does anyone else know that? That sounds good, and certainly is in Book I, Chapter I, Verse I of baseball dogma, but I’ve yet to see a way it could be proven true.

quote:

Let's be honest- when most hits happen, especially for extra base hits, it is because pitchers are missing the targeted location of what the catcher wants and has set up for. …

Are you sure about that? Again, it sounds good and comes right out of the book, but until someone comes up with a way to not show a pitch in relation to the strike zone, but in relation to where it was intended to be thrown, its gonna be a difficult sell.

But on the other hand, I seriously doubt that any pitcher throws any pitch in the exact location he intended, so I suppose in a way what you’re saying is true.

There’s just way too many factors taking place in an extremely small window of time to make such broad statements and have them be valid. It would be different if pitches that were where they were generally intended to be thrown weren’t hit very often, and that pitches that weren’t where they were intended to be thrown were hit at a high rate. But the truth is, pitches very often work when they miss the target completely, and very often don’t work when for all intents and purposes are thrown precisely where intended.

You’re trying to force this into black and white, but its shot past shades of gray, right into full blown 3-D, HD, living color on the I-Max screen.

GBM,

I’m glad to see someone else shares my belief that the accuracy of pitchers is much more myth than truth. Unfortunately, your method isn’t very sound. Unless you’ve got one super kind of TV I’ve never heard of, its virtually impossible to tell where a pitch was when it was hit. I like to see you use the 6” though. That mean a pitcher’s target is at least 27”. To me that’s a good size for a “spot”. The pinpoint accuracy that some attribute to pitchers is absurd though.

Keep thinkin’!

quote:

Originally posted by Stats4Gnats:
GBM,

I’m glad to see someone else shares my belief that the accuracy of pitchers is much more myth than truth. Unfortunately, your method isn’t very sound. Unless you’ve got one super kind of TV I’ve never heard of, its virtually impossible to tell where a pitch was when it was hit. I like to see you use the 6” though. That mean a pitcher’s target is at least 27”. To me that’s a good size for a “spot”. The pinpoint accuracy that some attribute to pitchers is absurd though.

Keep thinkin’!

I have long known that pitchers hitting their spots most of the time was somewhat mythical. Last night was the first time I actually made my own charts and watched and analyzed every pitch. My son, who also pitches helped me out. I am going to expand it a little more tonight and keep a few different stats besides my first ones. One would certainly have to track every pitch over the course of several years though to really see a trend though and to be honest- that is way out of anything I would ever want to do.

My method of seeing where a pitch would have been when hit is watching the catchers glove catch the ghost ball. The reason i go witha 6 inch spot is that it represnts the amount of movement in the wrist generally without moving the arm. Although, I did allow for more arm motion if it moved in the plane of the movement of the ball because I know a lot of catchers and pitchers use the target as an initial spot to throw at, not necessarily where it ends up.

quote:

Originally posted by Gingerbread Man:
I have long known that pitchers hitting their spots most of the time was somewhat mythical. Last night was the first time I actually made my own charts and watched and analyzed every pitch. My son, who also pitches helped me out. I am going to expand it a little more tonight and keep a few different stats besides my first ones. One would certainly have to track every pitch over the course of several years though to really see a trend though and to be honest- that is way out of anything I would ever want to do.

My method of seeing where a pitch would have been when hit is watching the catchers glove catch the ghost ball. The reason i go witha 6 inch spot is that it represnts the amount of movement in the wrist generally without moving the arm. Although, I did allow for more arm motion if it moved in the plane of the movement of the ball because I know a lot of catchers and pitchers use the target as an initial spot to throw at, not necessarily where it ends up.

The trouble with charting pitches, even on TV, is that is so difficult to get a true perspective of whare the ball is in relation to everything. But at least by using the glove, you’re using what’s described as the target 99% of the time.

You wouldn’t believe how many adult beverages I’ve won over the years by betting on pretty much what you’re doing. Its like taking candy from a baby because most people only THINK they know what’s happening. Another bet I used to love to make, was how many times a catcher would have to move his glove more than 2’ to catch a pitch. We videotaped a game in Az at the Jr Olys where a kid who was eventually to make it to the ML, made his C do that 37 times in an 84 pitch outing, and we didn’t count pitches put in play! His father couldn’t believe it, even though we counted them twice, and in slo mo.

Its like I keep trying to get people to understand, perception is not the same as reality.

Kind of freaky but, I tracked 200 pitches tonight during the Brewers vs. D-backs and came up with the same exact location percentage as i did last night- Pitchers hitting their location only 47% of the time. Pretty strange!

During that stretch there were 19 base hits. 15 of those base hits happened from a missed location- a mistake.

This topic grew suddenly quiet, perhaps the absurbity of the act of charting pitches when provided with a pitch tracker was a bit over the top.

Was wondering if you did the same excercise last night in the matchup game between Carp and Doc and what was your observation of the % of location hit or not?

+

quote:

a bit over the top

Indeed.

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:
This topic grew suddenly quiet, perhaps the absurbity of the act of charting pitches when provided with a pitch tracker was a bit over the top.

Did it grow quiet because what he was doing was absurd, or that people didn’t know what to do when faced with actual numbers, absurd or not? Even though I find fault with the accuracy of what he was doing, I have no problem at all believing that his numbers were a lot closer than what most folks want to believe, because I’ve come up with similar numbers myself.

quote:

Was wondering if you did the same excercise last night in the matchup game between Carp and Doc and what was your observation of the % of location hit or not?

I don’t chart anything, but I did score that game. Here’s a couple of things you may find interesting if not important.

Carpenter threw back to back strikes in at bat 22 times, Halladay 46 times.
Carpenter threw back to back balls in at bat 7 times, Halladay 12 times.
Carpenter threw back to back to back strikes in at bat 3 times, Halladay 18 times.
Carpenter threw back to back to back balls in at bat 1 time, Halladay twice.
Carpenter went 0-2 4 times, Halladay 7 times.
Carpenter went to 3 balls 3 times, Halladay 2 times.
Carpenter went 0-2 4 times, Halladay 7 times.
Carpenter threw 8 pitches in the dirt, none for strikes, Halladay did it 7 times and 2 were strikes.
The highest percentage of pitches Carpenter in relation to a single count type, were 34.9%, and they were strikes when the count was even. Halladay was the same, but his percentage was 30.2%.

He had been charting pitches, and what percentage ended up where the catcher set up and which didn't.

That's what I was inquiring about, not what you did. Sorry if that makes you feel left out, but my inquiry was not directed to you.

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:
This topic grew suddenly quiet, perhaps the absurbity of the act of charting pitches when provided with a pitch tracker was a bit over the top.

Was wondering if you did the same excercise last night in the matchup game between Carp and Doc and what was your observation of the % of location hit or not?

The absurdity of charting pitches? You can't be serious. Even big league team personal chart pitches...unbelievable.

It's quite obvious that the majority of people assume that the "average" MLB pitcher hits his location the majority of the time. My small sampling proved otherwise. I am swayed to believe that the average MLB pitcher can hit a spot in a general location such as "keeping it down" or "keeping it outside", etc, the majority of the time, but heck- even HS kids can do that. I don't buy into the zone getting tighter and tighter from rookie ball on up the system until you get to the majors. The strike zone, according to the rule books is the same for HS all the way up to the big leagues. There may be more inconsistancies at the lower levels, but the zone doesn't get smaller and smaller as one goes up the todem pole. That is another misconception.

TPM- This topic has grown quiet, in my opinion, largely because of a mass denigration of opinions that has occurred. After a while it is kind of a waste of time continually trying to prove your point when you know it won't get through someone's head. I assume that's why one will find that most of the people that began posting in this thread have now carefully shied away from it.

Stats- I'd like to piggyback on what you posted a bit. I normally like statistical analyses and what they do for the game. Your numbers, which I don't doubt are correct, shows consistencies that would cause an assumption that the result of the game was vastly different than what it was in reality. I am just curious as to how you would use these numbers in order to assist in analyzing a game performance. As I said, I appreciate you putting them together, and I may be naive in my questioning, but I am wondering how those numbers in particular are relative to the actual result.

Oh and for future reference TPM, I've learned that ignoring posts by a particular user certainly lightens the load of things you are trying to defend on the site. This particular thread is a great example of a place where I did not take that action soon enough.

quote:

The absurdity of charting pitches? You can't be serious. Even big league team personal chart pitches...unbelievable.

Yes, at home while watching a game is a bit different than big league team personel charting their pitchers pitches, would you agree?
I am under the assumption that they also chart what they threw not what the catcher set up (which is what you claimed to have done).

So did you do it or not and if so what was your conclusion of those two pitchers?

I have a reason for asking.

there is that term assumption once again

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:
there is that tewrm suumpyion one again

Say what?

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
Oh and for future reference TPM, I've learned that ignoring posts by a particular user certainly lightens the load of things you are trying to defend on the site. This particular thread is a great example of a place where I did not take that action soon enough.

Yeah I should take some of my own advice but I just am kind of wondering if GBM did the same thing last night in an epic game of 2 vet pitchers and what was his outcome and his conclusion as compared to the other pitchers.


Other points made today by the charter are not even worth debating and I am not going there either.

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
…Stats- I'd like to piggyback on what you posted a bit. I normally like statistical analyses and what they do for the game. Your numbers, which I don't doubt are correct, shows consistencies that would cause an assumption that the result of the game was vastly different than what it was in reality. I am just curious as to how you would use these numbers in order to assist in analyzing a game performance.

Pretty good questions here. I will answer them honestly, and hope that’s adequate.

A lot of times I produce metrics that don’t so much prove a player’s performance was either good or bad, but that its just not possible to use what was done as an indicator of success or failure. FI, while I think everyone would agree that a high 1st pitch strike percentage was better than a low one, for reasons of a pitcher getting ahead in the count generally being a good thing, there’s nothing to prove that a pitcher who’s FPS is lower than the other guy isn’t going to have as much or more success.

The reason is, the two things don’t necessarily go together, but can only “indicate” a trend. In the numbers for those 2 guys in that particular game, most “anomalies” can be explained by on guy throwing so many fewer pitcher than the other. That’s why its necessary to look at so many other things to get a better picture.

One of the ancillary reasons I decided to update my program to score the game, was that I could get many more things I was producing after the fact, while they were actually going on. For years I would tally many things as the game was going on, like pitch counts or number of 3 ball counts, but there’s only so many things one can tally and compute while trying to score a game. There’s no way I could keep a continuing tally and get the percentages for the number of balls, called, fouled, missed, and BIP strikes on even an inning basis, let alone as each pitch took place. Well, suddenly I can do that, and it opens up a lot of new thinking for me.

So, right at this moment in time, I don’t know what a lot of those numbers will do as far as game analysis or player performance, because I’ve only had access to them in this form for less than a few months. I put things in and take things out as I see they might have some use, or see that for sure they don’t. In fact, I’m seriously adding another type of strike by splitting swings and misses into two different categories.

I’ve seen at the ML level, the number of swings and misses on all pitches is almost always below 10% for a game. But, I’ve also noticed that of all those misses, it seems to be about as likely there is an “abbreviated” swing or checked swings, as there is a full swing and a miss. I don’t know if that’s significant, but it shows me there’s a difference in that the batter is fooled as opposed to him simply not getting the bat to the correct place to make contact.

quote:

As I said, I appreciate you putting them together, and I may be naive in my questioning, but I am wondering how those numbers in particular are relative to the actual result.

And that’s the reason I like to look at the numbers. I don’t know there’s any relation to the actual result, but as I said, looking at these numbers in real time is so new to me, I really haven’t had a lot of opportunity to come to many conclusions.

Its just another lurch forward of progress. There’s some kind of new information found, and it takes a while to figure out what it means or how to use it. There’s a similar kind of thing going on at the lower levels of the sport with data. With the advent of so many ways to produce stats, right now a lot of people are blown away by metrics they’ve never heard of before, but folks like myself have been using for years and treat as commonplace. Those folks are inundated with data in all kinds of forms, and will need a while to sort through it all and learn to pick out the things that they feel are useful. The same thing is happening with me.

There are so many new things available to me now, I really don’t’ know where to begin. I’m like a kid in a candy store. And the best part is, I didn’t have to “put anything together”. All I did was copy the numbers off the monitor. I wrote the compute code to generate them over a decade ago, and have had those numbers at my fingertips all those years. But, they were always numbers from the past, and mixed in as an aggregate. Its quite different seeing them pitch by pitch and trying to draw conclusions.

So there ya have it.

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:
Yeah I should take some of my own advice but I just am kind of wondering if GBM did the same thing last night in an epic game of 2 vet pitchers and what was his outcome and his conclusion as compared to the other pitchers. …

Why are you wondering?

+

/ how many hints do people need that they are obsessed?

Stats- Fair enough. I don't want my post to come off as an attack because of the nature of this thread in the past. I was just simply curious, and wasn't attacking in any way. I respect what you do and although I have my skepticism about the success of the results, I'm sure that comes with the territory. You could be just another stats-obsessed idiot, or you could be the next Bill James. I'm certainly not one to make that determination, but I do believe that if you feel that the stats you keep can help the game then you should absolutely stick by it.

quote:

Originally posted by J H:
Stats- Fair enough. I don't want my post to come off as an attack because of the nature of this thread in the past. I was just simply curious, and wasn't attacking in any way. I respect what you do and although I have my skepticism about the success of the results, I'm sure that comes with the territory. You could be just another stats-obsessed idiot, or you could be the next Bill James. I'm certainly not one to make that determination, but I do believe that if you feel that the stats you keep can help the game then you should absolutely stick by it.

I didn’t take it as being derogatory in any manner. You asked a couple of what I thought were very good questions, and ones that I’ve asked myself, and I tried to answer them as honestly as I could.

I don’t know that I’ve ever really worried about stats in a success/failure kind of way. I see them more in a fact/fiction way. It really rubs people the wrong way to have their beliefs challenged, and its unfortunate that folks who plow throw numbers have a tendency to do that. But its not done maliciously, at least in my case it isn’t, but more to have folks look a little deeper than what they see on the surface.

Some time back when linear weights were first beginning to be used in baseball, and people heard that the chances of a runner scoring from 1st with no outs was better than from second with 1 out, a lot of heads exploded all over the baseball world. A lot of people saw it as advocating never to bunt or steal a base because an out was more valuable than an extra base, but that wasn’t what anyone was doing.

All they did was present facts, and those facts showed the truth. How anyone wanted to use that information was entirely up to them. Unfortunately, some went way overboard, and some refused to even consider it. Well, over time, a lot of understanding has crept into the conversation, and I think the game is much better for it.

That’s all I try to do. I don’t advocate anyone change their minds just because I say so or even if the numbers say so, but I do expect to be given the opportunity to make a case and have thinking people consider it. The trouble is, this stuff isn’t like a light switch where when it gets thrown, suddenly all answers become intuitively obvious to the casual observer. True knowledge more often than not takes a lot of work on someone’s part, and a lot of time to become accepted. My hobby is trying to find that knowledge. If I don’t, at least I didn’t just accept something someone else said, and if I do, great. Maybe that little piece of knowledge may help someone down the road.

If this was the first thread I read on this forum, I doubt I would come back. It wouldn't seem worth it. I don't recall being exposed to such silly name calling and childish personal attacks since I got out of 6th grade. I mean, not just one post or poster but several.

Maybe we should open up a Personal Attack thread so the folks who feel so inclined can toss barbs at each other, and not impede the learning process for those who are trying to help their kids.

Just as we have Golden Threads, we should have Lead Threads, and I would nominate this one for that designation.

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

The absurdity of charting pitches? You can't be serious. Even big league team personal chart pitches...unbelievable.

Yes, at home while watching a game is a bit different than big league team personel charting their pitchers pitches, would you agree?
I am under the assumption that they also chart what they threw not what the catcher set up (which is what you claimed to have done).

So did you do it or not and if so what was your conclusion of those two pitchers?

I have a reason for asking.

I am not sure what game you are referring to but I purposely switched from game to game randomly between innings to get more of an "average" of a typical "average" type of MLB pitcher. I did it also again last night with the Tigers and Rangers playing and found the rsults to be strikingly similar- pitchers can't pin up their spots within 6 inches the majority of th etime, that % being just under 50%. With breaking balls I take into consideration what the pitcher and catcher are trying to achieve and thus go more in favor or more leniant in hitting a spot if it gets the desired result. For instance- if a catcher is wanting a breaking ball low and away and instead it went low and inside I would generally still say he hit his spot, especially if induced a swing.

There were innings I charted where the pitcher was hitting his spot 70-80% of the time, but the next inning those numbers would flip-flop and be only like 20-30% of the time.

Of special consideration, I am not speaking of the few elite MLB pitchers who do have pinpoint control. I am speaking along the lines of what % the average MLB pitcher throws.

My conclusions thus show that the average pitcher at the MLB level can't hit their spots more than 50% of the time. I am not suggesting in any way that MLB pitchers do a poor job at hitting their location versus any other league below them, I am merely suggesting the results show that they miss more than we think they do- we tend to give them credit for having pin-point control when in reality, they just plain don't. They survive (the average MLB pitchers)and excell generally because of their stuff and not really any kind of pinpoint control.

We could argue a lot of issues on this board and never really get anywhere until we can start to really analyze the facts. I think it can be reasonbly accepted that pitchers regularly do miss their locations in games- especially big games. Pitchers have good outings and bad outings. Hitters usually hit mistakes for their batting average. If pitchers and catchers were precise enough in hitting their locations according to their homework, there would be tons more of perfect games and no-hitters. the reason they are rare is because of one simple fact- On average, pitchers just can't hit their location or have their best stuff on a consistant basis.

More often than we think, pitches really do find themselves over the heart of the plate and yet batters still have a hard time hitting grooved balls down the gut. If that weren't true, then the average MLB batter would have averages in the .500-.750 range or higher. Catchers also set up more down the middle than we tend to believe, especially when pitchers get behind and get in trouble. We tend to assume that nothing should ever be thrown down the middle when in fact a very high percentage of pitches actually do end up down the middle. I can't quite remember who it was that was recently at bat and they struck out on three different pitches that all found themselves down the general heart of the plate. Sure, the pitcher missed his spots on two of them, but the result in this case was just the same. Of note however is the praise all the commentators gave him and his control. Another batter was up and hit a ball that didn't really miss it's location and the commentators were quick to jump in on his "control issues" and such. I tend to think that we as viewers, coaches, team-mates, tec do the sam ething- we want to find some fault and exaggerate it when the chips aren't going your way and on the other hand when luck does fall in place, we tend to overlook the otherwise apparent obvious facts that is the reality of average baseball.

We recently had a game where the catcher, on every pitch was setting up a high target throughout the whole game. But because the pitcher was breezing through the innings, the coaches never really noticed or cared. The pitcher was of course frustrated with the lack of catcher experience. Then, in another game the batters are teeing off the pitcher and suddenly everyone is critiquing exactly where the catcher is or is not setting up. This is a common phenomenon of the mind and how it works-

When we see a pitcher throw shut-out we automatically register things in our mind such as "wow, he had great control of his location", only remembering the good points and forgetting the bad ones.

Those are the facts- let's analyze that- why pitches do find the heart of the strike zone more often than we think, why catchers really do set up more in the middle of the strike zone than we think, why batters really aren't as good as we think at hitting balls down the middle of the plate. I think our minds, on their own natural faults, tend to forget certain aspects and only pick up on others.

I am not sure I really get all of this, where a pitcher hits his "spot" has to do with where he actually releases the ball.

I mean you can watch the catcher set up where ever he does, if the pitcher can't release it properly he is not going to locate, is he?

I just think that you are making too much out of a concept that really isn't that difficult for most to understand.

+

Release point is difficult for sure. Our head coach is always saying how if our pitcher can just hit his spot with the breaking ball he will get so and so out. Of course, our pitchers seldom hit the glove in this "spot" as the coach wants. But, if it gets the job done intended, the coach has nothing but praise and if he misses he gets frustrated. Pretty much at any level, no pitcher is going to locate his breaking ball with pin-point control the majority of the time, even at the MLB level. However, they often times can manage to get the job done regardless of missing their spot. This general rule applies with HS ball with good pitchers also.

How often do we see a first pitch hung curveball that the batter doesn't swing on, not only at the HS level but also the MLB level? It happens quite often. Pitchers miss their location and yet it doesn't hurt them, it ends up helping them quite often.

And where did I put my picture of a dead horse with a bunch of people with clubs????????

quote:

Originally posted by coach2709:
And where did I put my picture of a dead horse with a bunch of people with clubs????????

Some of the posters on here have this amazing ability to resurrect this dead horse. We have killed the thing about 4 times only to see it raised from the dead every time.

And those who reply to those who ressurect the dead are just as guilty. I guess the dead horse wasn't all that high and mighty.