Strange stat of the week from high school

One of our older son's college pitching coaches told him was 'strike in the first two pitches' which he found very helpful both from a 'relax' point of view but also developing a strategy for the hitter.

justbaseball posted:

One of our older son's college pitching coaches told him was 'strike in the first two pitches' which he found very helpful both from a 'relax' point of view but also developing a strategy for the hitter.

Gotta say I like that better than the old-school idea that you just have to get a strike on the first pitch.

Root PC?

proudhesmine posted:

Root PC?

92. He was supposed to be on an 80 pitch count and ended the fifth at 81, but talked the HC into a sixth inning. Head Coach then got the finger across the throat sign from dad. He told me afterward he knew better. Luckily, he struck out the side on 11 pitches in the sixth and actually struck out the last 5 batters he faced in the game.

Here's where I have to give a shout out to the Marc Pro. For the first time, we had him use it in the dugout between inning. He reports that his arm felt as fresh heading to the mound in the sixth as it did in the first. he also felt warmed up enough to only throw three warm up pitches to start every inning. He used it again for 45 minutes on the bus ride home and reports that he feels like he go again today with no problems. I love that thing.

I'll also say he was throwing 88 in the first and his sixth inning fastballs were all still in the 85-86 range.

Nice Root!  Great outing.  

Of course, it doesn't apply nearly as much for a HS P that touches 88 that he always has to work ahead.  He has that weapon in his arsenal that allows him to come back and just overpower most HS hitters, regardless of count.  Most HS P's can't go that route and expect to have any degree of consistent success.

Is there really a difference between and a tense unit?I know what thier site states.The frequency rating on the one here at the house is the same as the marc.Any thoughts?

proudhesmine posted:

Is there really a difference between and a tense unit?I know what thier site states.The frequency rating on the one here at the house is the same as the marc.Any thoughts?

I've used TENS units and it feels entirely different, so I buy what Marc Pro says about the difference in the e-stim release being relatively gradual vs. immediate. I used to use a TENS for my neck and it definitely relieved the pain, but often left the muscles a little sore like after weightlifting. I do, however, think you can find better deals on e-stim units, which should be basically the same.

roothog66 posted:

This was the stat that stands out for me from my son's first start of the year:

First pitch strike percentage: 27%

He faced 22 batters over six innings and only started 6 of them out with a strike. Just looking at that stat in isolation, you would expect a bad start. Final line:

6 ip, 1 hit, 1 er, 1 hbp, 14 K's, 1 BB.

His overall strike percentage was a more reasonable 59.7%.

He struck out four batters that he got behind 3-0 and two that he was behind 3-1 on. Strangely, he was ahead 0-2 on the lone walk.

This shows why anyone who tries to make a performance judgement by looking at only one stat is a fool.

Stats4Gnats posted:

roothog66 posted:

This was the stat that stands out for me from my son's first start of the year:

First pitch strike percentage: 27%

He faced 22 batters over six innings and only started 6 of them out with a strike. Just looking at that stat in isolation, you would expect a bad start. Final line:

6 ip, 1 hit, 1 er, 1 hbp, 14 K's, 1 BB.

His overall strike percentage was a more reasonable 59.7%.

He struck out four batters that he got behind 3-0 and two that he was behind 3-1 on. Strangely, he was ahead 0-2 on the lone walk.

 

This shows why anyone who tries to make a performance judgement by looking at only one stat is a fool.

 

 

 

I see you get the meaning behind the OP.

justbaseball posted:

One of our older son's college pitching coaches told him was 'strike in the first two pitches' which he found very helpful both from a 'relax' point of view but also developing a strategy for the hitter.

How many college pitching coaches did he have?

While it is true getting a strike on the 1^st pitch doesn’t guarantee anything, my data proves beyond any doubt that a K after getting a 1^st pitch strike is far more likely than a 1^st pitch ball, and a walk after a 1^st pitch ball is far more likely than after a 1^st pitch strike. While that will vary from pitcher to pitcher and level to level, I suspect you can look at the overall data from any level and it will hold true. As I said, a 1^st pitch strike doesn’t guarantee anything, but it does provide a sound basis for wanting to throw one.

I haven’t looked at only data from when 1 of the 1^st 2 pitches was a strike, but I have looked at what happens if the 1^st pitch after a 1-1 count is a strike, and it only re-enforces what’s seen if the 1^st pitch is a strike. A lot of that comes from there only need to be 3 strikes to get a K while it takes 4 balls for a walk and it often changes the approach of the batter. But the fact remains that my data provides a strong argument for throwing strikes. I don’t doubt there’s data out there that refutes it, but all I’ve ever seen is opinions on that, not factual evidence.

In Root’s example, the question shouldn’t be whether it was a good performance or not, but whether it would have been an even better performance if the FPS% was 73% instead of 27%. If nothing else it likely would have saved him at least 10 pitches. That might not mean a lot to a HS pitcher throwing in the high 80’s, but that’s certainly not the average HS pitcher, and who wants to see the average pitcher getting behind 1-0 73% of the time?

Stats4Gnats posted:

justbaseball posted:

One of our older son's college pitching coaches told him was 'strike in the first two pitches' which he found very helpful both from a 'relax' point of view but also developing a strategy for the hitter.

 

How many college pitching coaches did he have?

 

While it is true getting a strike on the 1^st pitch doesn’t guarantee anything, my data proves beyond any doubt that a K after getting a 1^st pitch strike is far more likely than a 1^st pitch ball, and a walk after a 1^st pitch ball is far more likely than after a 1^st pitch strike. While that will vary from pitcher to pitcher and level to level, I suspect you can look at the overall data from any level and it will hold true. As I said, a 1^st pitch strike doesn’t guarantee anything, but it does provide a sound basis for wanting to throw one.

 

I haven’t looked at only data from when 1 of the 1^st 2 pitches was a strike, but I have looked at what happens if the 1^st pitch after a 1-1 count is a strike, and it only re-enforces what’s seen if the 1^st pitch is a strike. A lot of that comes from there only need to be 3 strikes to get a K while it takes 4 balls for a walk and it often changes the approach of the batter. But the fact remains that my data provides a strong argument for throwing strikes. I don’t doubt there’s data out there that refutes it, but all I’ve ever seen is opinions on that, not factual evidence.

 

In Root’s example, the question shouldn’t be whether it was a good performance or not, but whether it would have been an even better performance if the FPS% was 73% instead of 27%. If nothing else it likely would have saved him at least 10 pitches. That might not mean a lot to a HS pitcher throwing in the high 80’s, but that’s certainly not the average HS pitcher, and who wants to see the average pitcher getting behind 1-0 73% of the time?

Yeah, of course. Over the past couple of years, it's  probably been 58% - 59%. I like it around there. A pitcher gets in the habit of throwing it down the middle for strike one too often will find guys swinging on the first pitch. I've often wondered why we don't think of this more in terms of first ball percentage. Remember that a first pitch ball in play counts as a strike, so what I often see at the youth and high school levels is a lot of very high first strike percentages coupled with very high earned run averages. Guys who put it down the middle and get clobbered tend to have high first strike percentages. 

We have a guy who has developed into a starter this year.  He's been doing well, but last game he was really off.   Was constantly pitching from behind, never got a first strike in, got to 3 balls on seemingly every batter, walked a few batters, got dinged for a couple runs, and got pulled with 80+ pitches after the fourth. It was hard to watch live, but  afterwards I had the feeling that  wasn't really seeing his game right so I watched a video that a parent made. Watching the it, you realized that even though the kid wasn't sharp, when he came into the zone he dominated.  The hitters couldn't catch up to his fastball, and they waved at his offspeed stuff.  There were only 3 hard hit balls in 4 innings.

So my point is yeah, strike one is the most important pitch in baseball, and yeah coaches want a certain percentage of strikes, and so on, but if a HS pitcher has dominating stuff, he's going to dominate most HS  hitters whether he's pitching ahead or pitching from behind, so long as he gets the ball near the zone eventually.  Sounds like that's very true of your kid.

roothog66 posted:

Yeah, of course. Over the past couple of years, it's  probably been 58% - 59%. I like it around there.

Luckily with all the scoring/stat apps floating around now-a-days it’s pretty simple to get a FPS%, so my guess is it won’t be too long before we start seeing the FPS% of pitchers who got drafted. Keep in mind that all but a very few pitchers are within a 20% spread, so just a few percentage points can say a lot.

On the individual list I provided, one pitcher was drafted in the 3^rd round and was real low-90+ as a Jr. He was less than 50% FPS overall. High velocity makes everyone ignore things that would otherwise be show-stoppers.

A pitcher gets in the habit of throwing it down the middle for strike one too often will find guys swinging on the first pitch.

Well, a couple things here. 1^st of all, throwing it down the middle on purpose is not something many HS pitchers can do, but even if they could and did, I’d say that would reflect on some pretty bad coaching, or at least pretty bad pitch calling.

The best I’ve seen at getting a lot of FPSs are not throwing a 1^st pitch cock-shot at all, and in fact sure seem to be mixing up 1^st pitch types and locations. Of course that’s only my “perception” because I don’t chart pitches so I certainly could be wrong.

I've often wondered why we don't think of this more in terms of first ball percentage. Remember that a first pitch ball in play counts as a strike, so what I often see at the youth and high school levels is a lot of very high first strike percentages coupled with very high earned run averages.

That’s a simple one. There’s no way to tell a pitch’s location accurately without some kind of technology. What you may perceive as a “ball” put in play may very well have been called a strike if not swung at.

Guys who put it down the middle and get clobbered tend to have high first strike percentages. 

Of course if a pitcher can and does put every 1^st pitch down the middle it makes sense he’s gonna get hit harder than “normal”. But how many ptcher do that and how many coaches would allow it for very long?

I can’t say what happens at levels below HSV, but at the V level in my experience high ERAs don’t go hand-in-hand with high FPS%ages. Please see attached. It may be true for an inning or even a game, but when looking at all the innings I just don’t see it.