It’s interesting watching this and then going back to your video about Wheeler from a few years ago. Clearly he was doing well and what he had was working, but to then add more on top of that really creates an arsenal that’s hard to go against. Do you feel like the Phillies’ staff emphasizes a wider arsenal since they have their starters going for more innings than most others?
Great call! I hadn’t thought about the connection back to the Wheeler video. That’s a deep cut haha good callback Feels like a chicken or egg thing on your last question. I think it’s probably something like … Phillies prioritize pitchers that have ability to throw 2-3 fastballs or one very unique one (Sanchez), as a byproduct of that they can go deep, and the added pitches are thus gravy (ie, Nola hasn’t really changed or added much, but Wheeler has)
Having a one or two pitch pitcher never made sense to me. I have always felt that such a limited arsenal just increases the volatility of a pitcher. If one isn't working during an appearance or a stretch of appearances, it means the pitcher then is limited to a much worse number 2 pitch. Even the Yankees, a low pitch mix organization, has had to reach Rodon an extra pitch.
Yeah, and we’ve even seen a some of the shallow mix guys like Strider try to expand (before his injury). Sticking with 2 pitches for ~2 seasons or more seems somewhat extinct among SPs. Hitters are too good
See Murray Dickson who changed up his arm angles, toe placement, and delivery speeds to create different varieties to stack on top of his pitch repertoire.
I’ll check him out! Skenes moves on the rubber based on the handedness. I always thought it would be interesting to see him do that to the same hitter within a game rather than solely basing it on handedness
great video! one thing i wanted to ask about that's (somewhat tangentially) related to the discussion of how pitches become worse as hitters see the same pitch over and over - what do you think about the approach of conserving stuff, where pitchers like Hunter Greene will save their incredibly high-end velo (moving from like 94-95 to 99 and 100) until later in the game? feels like its allowing him to essentially beat hitters at their game by ticking up the velo and changing how they need to handle the pitch, and feels like a way to kinda replicate the effects of additional pitches while still letting them throw their best pitch. (forgive me if this is an already commonly understood thing, i just feel like i haven't seen many pitchers replicate the approach to quite the same effect as greene.)
Yeah, this is the old Verlander strategy, right? I think the main thing is that you have to have a really high baseline level of velo to pull back 3-4 ticks and still be effective. And it also helps to have great shape, such that your not a velo-dependent pitcher and when you come down velo your stuff doesn’t bottom out (ie, Greene’s fastball shape isn’t great but he throws it hard) The dropoff in performance between a pitch at 97 vs 94 is pretty dramatic. So for it to work, you gotta do something else to stave off velo regression. I just don’t think a lot of pitchers have that / it’s easier to just widen your mix.
@LanceBroz will say greenes fastball shape improved significantly this year (which is what lead to those crazy, crazy hard hit numbers) but that makes a lot of sense, thanks!
Hey Lance, great video as always. Was wondering if any of the pitching coaches specifically mentioned the value of diversity + comfortability in behind the count situations with carry power arms? Thinking of guys like Greene who might benefit from not just from not just having another offseason to refine his splitter but also increased comfortability in throwing it behind the count.
Unfortunately nothing specifically mentioned in the panel about this, but I would imagine most of them would subscribe to the thought of it.👍 I think behind in count usage and diversity is definitely something to exploit. Most guys can zone non-fastballs a reasonable amount such that elevating strike pitches as much as they do never makes sense to me. Issue with carry fastball types is that a lot of those guys have high spin efficiency, and because seam effects need gyro to help (aka low spin efficiency) we don’t see a lot of big carry fastball types going towards sinkers. Jeff Hoffman is probably one that added one recently? And it’s purely a pitch he jams inside, I can’t imagine it would work much in zone
I'm not as locked in on the nity gritty of baseball or a coach. I'm just a fan of the content and I find it interesting but I do think exposing someone to a 4, 5 pitch type mix earlier is good. As long it makes sense for them to throw the new pitch and they can execute it with average stuff, it would be beneficial regardless. As you mention in the video, it gives them more time to 'adapt' to the mix and lets them learn the sequences early. They would also get the benefit of being able to refine their arsenal overtime for longer, should they survive the struggles too. So even if they weren't expected to be a great major leaguer, they could eventually find their way to a long career by vitrue of being able to eat innings or being solid 3rd-5th starters, which all orgs can appreciate.
@ that’s definitely true, seems like they are very confident. They say it takes 10,000 hours to master something and maybe they want their prospects to focus on improving their offerings before adding. Great Video Lance!
Do we consider a high FF and a low FF as the same pitch here? In the Skenes v. Ohtani clip you showed all the pitches were in the same plane. This probably is more of a tunneling perspective, but I'm genuinely curious. The idea of hitters reading a SL as a FF by mistake is an effect of command.
Great question. In terms of buyback and decay, which aren’t totally fleshed out in an article or something, I would say there is one decay curve for a pitch that is affected differently based on the pitch’s location (hope that makes sense). So if you move locations, the pitch decays differently than if it was in one spot. I believe I’ve made videos on this before, but tunneling and command are pretty difficult to separate imo. Driveline digging into “match” is the best way to look at tunneling, but even then I’ll admit that it’s arsenal level. So you have to layer in the elements of batter-vs-pitcher decay to talk more specifically about pitch to pitch occurrences of tunneling, etc Maybe I overthink things like this but it’s fascinating to me!
@LanceBroz this makes sense. I wonder how different decay curves are for pitcher v. Batter that are extremely familiar to each other. I imagine it's a more chaotic curve.
It's not a simple answer. Yes having more pitches would be better but the problem is are those added pitches good. Adding a plus off speed is tough. For example let's say a reliever (4seam ++, slider +, changeup +) adds a curveball that is mediocre. They shouldn't mix that curve in as much as their slider or changeup. They should use it sparingly in situations where it could be a good option. Where it could catch a hitter off guard. But if the pitch you add is plus then mix it in like the others
I think a point that I probably didn’t make too well in here is that adding average or even slightly below average pitches to a mix have benefit. Especially if you’re a starter without outlier stuff in the first place Which is something that stuff models, to my knowledge, don’t seem to care too much about.
@@LanceBroz This is exactly why I really wish I could get an under-the-hood “tour” of a stuff model to see how they’re built, and really understand the typical methodology (I have a background in marketing analytics). For example, from what I can tell, they don’t really seem to account for interactivity effects between pitches in an arsenal, and maybe they can’t, because they might vary too much, be too dependent on a pitcher’s command, etc. Is that partly why they often have so much trouble with changeups? So many questions.
Haha I’ve always thought he needed something to bridge to his curveball, aka, a better slider But his CH was so bad last year I could see a tweak there helping out
Kyle Harrison should be in the bullpen. He's never been able to throw an effective non-fastball because he likely lacks an inherent feel for spin. Him and Andrew Heaney are extremely similar.
It could! But I think these cases are rarer. I’d say they generally fall into either a) having a pitcher throw a pitch they can’t really achieve well (sweeper) or b) creating too many heavy gyro shapes too close to one another (gyro slider + cutter)
@LanceBroz I've heard it happen w FA shapes. Bannister also says it's could to prioritize one direction or the other. Like adding HB to a CH could minimize SW shape - I've def seen this change.
It’s interesting watching this and then going back to your video about Wheeler from a few years ago. Clearly he was doing well and what he had was working, but to then add more on top of that really creates an arsenal that’s hard to go against.
Do you feel like the Phillies’ staff emphasizes a wider arsenal since they have their starters going for more innings than most others?
Great call! I hadn’t thought about the connection back to the Wheeler video. That’s a deep cut haha good callback
Feels like a chicken or egg thing on your last question. I think it’s probably something like … Phillies prioritize pitchers that have ability to throw 2-3 fastballs or one very unique one (Sanchez), as a byproduct of that they can go deep, and the added pitches are thus gravy (ie, Nola hasn’t really changed or added much, but Wheeler has)
Having a one or two pitch pitcher never made sense to me. I have always felt that such a limited arsenal just increases the volatility of a pitcher. If one isn't working during an appearance or a stretch of appearances, it means the pitcher then is limited to a much worse number 2 pitch. Even the Yankees, a low pitch mix organization, has had to reach Rodon an extra pitch.
Yeah, and we’ve even seen a some of the shallow mix guys like Strider try to expand (before his injury).
Sticking with 2 pitches for ~2 seasons or more seems somewhat extinct among SPs. Hitters are too good
See Murray Dickson who changed up his arm angles, toe placement, and delivery speeds to create different varieties to stack on top of his pitch repertoire.
I’ll check him out! Skenes moves on the rubber based on the handedness. I always thought it would be interesting to see him do that to the same hitter within a game rather than solely basing it on handedness
"Quantity has a quality all its own" -Winston Churchill
🔥🔥🔥
(While I appreciate the nod to history - this is not a Churchill quote…it is dubiously attributed to Stalin, and probably aporcryphal either way).
Lance, I love your videos. Keep up the good work.
Thanks! 🙏
great video! one thing i wanted to ask about that's (somewhat tangentially) related to the discussion of how pitches become worse as hitters see the same pitch over and over - what do you think about the approach of conserving stuff, where pitchers like Hunter Greene will save their incredibly high-end velo (moving from like 94-95 to 99 and 100) until later in the game? feels like its allowing him to essentially beat hitters at their game by ticking up the velo and changing how they need to handle the pitch, and feels like a way to kinda replicate the effects of additional pitches while still letting them throw their best pitch. (forgive me if this is an already commonly understood thing, i just feel like i haven't seen many pitchers replicate the approach to quite the same effect as greene.)
Yeah, this is the old Verlander strategy, right? I think the main thing is that you have to have a really high baseline level of velo to pull back 3-4 ticks and still be effective. And it also helps to have great shape, such that your not a velo-dependent pitcher and when you come down velo your stuff doesn’t bottom out (ie, Greene’s fastball shape isn’t great but he throws it hard)
The dropoff in performance between a pitch at 97 vs 94 is pretty dramatic. So for it to work, you gotta do something else to stave off velo regression. I just don’t think a lot of pitchers have that / it’s easier to just widen your mix.
@LanceBroz will say greenes fastball shape improved significantly this year (which is what lead to those crazy, crazy hard hit numbers) but that makes a lot of sense, thanks!
Hey Lance, great video as always. Was wondering if any of the pitching coaches specifically mentioned the value of diversity + comfortability in behind the count situations with carry power arms? Thinking of guys like Greene who might benefit from not just from not just having another offseason to refine his splitter but also increased comfortability in throwing it behind the count.
Unfortunately nothing specifically mentioned in the panel about this, but I would imagine most of them would subscribe to the thought of it.👍
I think behind in count usage and diversity is definitely something to exploit. Most guys can zone non-fastballs a reasonable amount such that elevating strike pitches as much as they do never makes sense to me.
Issue with carry fastball types is that a lot of those guys have high spin efficiency, and because seam effects need gyro to help (aka low spin efficiency) we don’t see a lot of big carry fastball types going towards sinkers.
Jeff Hoffman is probably one that added one recently? And it’s purely a pitch he jams inside, I can’t imagine it would work much in zone
I'm not as locked in on the nity gritty of baseball or a coach. I'm just a fan of the content and I find it interesting but I do think exposing someone to a 4, 5 pitch type mix earlier is good. As long it makes sense for them to throw the new pitch and they can execute it with average stuff, it would be beneficial regardless. As you mention in the video, it gives them more time to 'adapt' to the mix and lets them learn the sequences early.
They would also get the benefit of being able to refine their arsenal overtime for longer, should they survive the struggles too. So even if they weren't expected to be a great major leaguer, they could eventually find their way to a long career by vitrue of being able to eat innings or being solid 3rd-5th starters, which all orgs can appreciate.
Very interesting that the rays seem to have less depth in their repertoires yet produce great pitchers consistently.
Yeah! I was a bit surprised. But as I mention, I wonder if they’re just confident that Synder & Co can add those pitches late without issue
@ that’s definitely true, seems like they are very confident. They say it takes 10,000 hours to master something and maybe they want their prospects to focus on improving their offerings before adding. Great Video Lance!
Do we consider a high FF and a low FF as the same pitch here? In the Skenes v. Ohtani clip you showed all the pitches were in the same plane. This probably is more of a tunneling perspective, but I'm genuinely curious. The idea of hitters reading a SL as a FF by mistake is an effect of command.
Great question. In terms of buyback and decay, which aren’t totally fleshed out in an article or something, I would say there is one decay curve for a pitch that is affected differently based on the pitch’s location (hope that makes sense).
So if you move locations, the pitch decays differently than if it was in one spot.
I believe I’ve made videos on this before, but tunneling and command are pretty difficult to separate imo.
Driveline digging into “match” is the best way to look at tunneling, but even then I’ll admit that it’s arsenal level. So you have to layer in the elements of batter-vs-pitcher decay to talk more specifically about pitch to pitch occurrences of tunneling, etc
Maybe I overthink things like this but it’s fascinating to me!
@LanceBroz this makes sense. I wonder how different decay curves are for pitcher v. Batter that are extremely familiar to each other. I imagine it's a more chaotic curve.
An org will hire this man very soon
It's not a simple answer. Yes having more pitches would be better but the problem is are those added pitches good. Adding a plus off speed is tough.
For example let's say a reliever (4seam ++, slider +, changeup +) adds a curveball that is mediocre. They shouldn't mix that curve in as much as their slider or changeup. They should use it sparingly in situations where it could be a good option. Where it could catch a hitter off guard.
But if the pitch you add is plus then mix it in like the others
I think a point that I probably didn’t make too well in here is that adding average or even slightly below average pitches to a mix have benefit. Especially if you’re a starter without outlier stuff in the first place
Which is something that stuff models, to my knowledge, don’t seem to care too much about.
@@LanceBroz This is exactly why I really wish I could get an under-the-hood “tour” of a stuff model to see how they’re built, and really understand the typical methodology (I have a background in marketing analytics). For example, from what I can tell, they don’t really seem to account for interactivity effects between pitches in an arsenal, and maybe they can’t, because they might vary too much, be too dependent on a pitcher’s command, etc. Is that partly why they often have so much trouble with changeups? So many questions.
Makes me think of Schwellenbach adding like 5 pitches in a few months
Yep! Great example, I should’ve brought him into this video
Eno Saris has talked about how he think pitchers should be random number generators
Eno is the man! I totally agree
Kyle Harrison should add a Splitter
Haha I’ve always thought he needed something to bridge to his curveball, aka, a better slider
But his CH was so bad last year I could see a tweak there helping out
Kyle Harrison should be in the bullpen. He's never been able to throw an effective non-fastball because he likely lacks an inherent feel for spin. Him and Andrew Heaney are extremely similar.
Dors adding more pitches into an arsenal negatively affect the existing pitches?
It could! But I think these cases are rarer. I’d say they generally fall into either a) having a pitcher throw a pitch they can’t really achieve well (sweeper) or b) creating too many heavy gyro shapes too close to one another (gyro slider + cutter)
@LanceBroz I've heard it happen w FA shapes.
Bannister also says it's could to prioritize one direction or the other. Like adding HB to a CH could minimize SW shape - I've def seen this change.