Jake Peavy and release point
Jake Peavy is a topic that usually elicits a negative kneejerk reaction from White Sox fans. And with good reason. While it's a bit unfair to lump Peavy in with Alex Rios and Adam Dunn because he actually has done okay when he's pitched, that sort of highlights the issue: $17 million is supposed to buy you "very good" and "makes 30+ starts".
Over in a fanpost on the right rail, there was a discussion about whether Peavy has pitched better than the results show. Those who think he has cite to his FIP, which in 2011 was significantly better than his ERA (3.31 versus 4.92). Those who think he hasn't point to his unremarkable BABIP (suggesting no bad luck) and his terrible strand rate, which was coupled with hitters teeing off on him to the tune of .355/.400/.555 when runners are on base (as opposed to .216/.246/.297 with the bases empty).
One theory for his inability to pitch with runners on base is that he is mentally weak or, to put it more mildly, he is so pissed off that he let someone on base that he loses the ability to pitch. His animated nature when bad things happen lends credence to this argument.
On the other hand, one of the other things Peavy and every other pitcher does when there's a runner on base is pitch from the stretch instead of the wind-up. And some pitchers have mechanical issues pitching from the stretch. I suggested that perhaps this was part of the answer because I had noticed throughout the season the difficulty Peavy appeared to have with his mechanics generally. I also noted that Peavy was unable to throw side sessions for most of the season and that is pretty much the only time other than during games a pitcher can effectively work on mechanics.
All this naturally led me to Peavy's Pitch F/X data at the indispensable Brooks Baseball. After the jump, I'll show you what I found. And, for those who prefer to "enjoy the game for what it is", be warned that there are graphs.
This initial set is taken from 5/18/11-5/22/11. All games were at U.S. Cellular Field. While I'm not concerned with the Pitch F/X tool being calibrated the same for my purposes in this post, there are other things that one can take from this data that would benefit from that so, for those looking at those things, there shouldn't be any issues with different calibrations. It's really the size and shape of the cluster we're looking at, wherever it may be on the graph.
First, this is the release point of Gavin Floyd.
Now, Jake Peavy.
(If you want to see Phil Humber, John Danks and Mark Buehrle, go here). You probably noticed that Peavy's is a bit more spread out than Floyd's and the others but not remarkably so. While it's generally a good idea to have a consistent release point, even for different pitches, it's not necessarily an issue for a pitcher to vary their release point (and "release point" in the singular may be a misnomer, as pitchers have different "release points" for different pitches). And, at least for this game, Peavy didn't have much of an issue as that game was arguably Peavy's best all season: a complete game shutout of the Indians with 8 strikeouts, no walks and 3 hits.
So let's take a look at a bad Peavy outing. You can pretty much take your pick of games after his ill-advised relief appearance on June 25. Here's July 10 against the Twins, in which he took a beating: 4.1 IP, 10 hits, 2 walks, 2 strikeouts and 5 runs.
It's a bit more spread out. How about some from later in the season just before he was shut down?
A similar story, probably even a bit more spread out. Now, again, this isn't per se a problem for a pitcher. And there may be some other things going on, such as moving on the pitching rubber, that is causing the variance. But the same release point for various types of pitches can be useful for deception, as the trained eye of a major league hitter is capable of picking up even slight variations. And I would argue that it's good for control and command as the pitcher is doing the same thing from the same spot, over and over, no matter whether there is a runner on base, no matter who is batting, no matter what he's throwing. For example, when you read criticism of prospects like Jake Petricka for not repeating their mechanics, this is the sort of thing being referred to.
So let's get to what may be the point of all of this. I'm not going to resolve in this post the issue of why Peavy sucks with runners on base because I got sidetracked when I went back to one of the reasons Peavy is paid so much: his 2007 Cy Young award winning season.
May 11, 2007:
September 1, 2007:
Those both look a lot tighter.
[Now, since I don't want to be accused of too much selection bias, there were indeed times that 2007 Peavy wasn't as sharp as these two examples. And 2011 Peavy did tighten things up on occasion (7/26 is one). But what you see here is representative of the release point clusters for these two seasons.]
I then wanted to take a look at the cluster for his entire 2007 season. But my go to site for that, Texas Leaguers, still doesn't have the 2007 season data up. So I did the next best thing and looked at his 2008 data. Then I compared it to his 2011 data. Unfortunately, the 2008 data seemed a bit messed up and it wasn't making sense to me.
So I went to 2009, which appeared to make more sense when compared to 2011.
2009 appears to be a tighter cluster than 2011. But, again, how much can the data be trusted? I'm not sure but I continued to plow on and I commend those of you who are still with me. Looking for confirmation, I compared his slider (the classifications of his fastballs are not as accurate in 2009 as they are in 2011, so I picked a pitch that should be correctly identified in both years). I also checked 2010.
And then I compared his curveball.
In both, 2011 looks a lot messier than 2009. And 2010 also looks better than 2011.
So what's the takeaway? I'm not totally sure at this point, in part because of the gaps in the data and how much to trust the data. I think it is safe to say that his release point is less consistent during games now than in 2007. The data from the full seasons of 2009, 2010 and 2011 also appear to show a gradually less consistent release point. It looks like he's having trouble repeating his mechanics, resulting in reduced command. It merits further and more granular analysis. Unfortunately, it's past 4am so I'm going to have to stop for now.
Whatever it is, the results for Peavy haven't been what they were in 2007. Getting back to whatever it was that he was doing mechanically in 2007 (or even 2009) may be the key to getting back to more like the results he was producing last decade.
74 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So what I think you are saying is
There are known knowns. There are things we know we know.
We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don’t know.
Christ, when do the games start?
Does this post qualify
As an unknown known political reference?
if you don't know
then you don’t love america
by obnoxious american on Jan 20, 2012 8:48 AM CST up reply actions
And here I thought he was just quoting Samuel L. Jackson in the Boondocks.
by mechanical turk on Jan 20, 2012 11:27 AM CST up reply actions
Immediatley where my mind went as well.
"Many people need desperately to receive this message: 'I feel and think much as you do, care about many of the things you care about, although most people do not care about them. You are not alone.'"
They all know this already, right?
Coop, Peavy, someone dedicated to this kind of think on a professional team surely have examined what you examined, and to a much more granular level, right? I often wish for some active player or higher up personel that is a regular reader of SSS – one who can nudge the guy (usually was Ozzy) who is talked about in a given SSS article, to take a look for their own good. In this case, it’s just a given, seeing how it’s all so valuable, that the look at the same data, in a friggin boatload more detail, and can fine tune the problem & solution, right?
If not, WTF?
by bevingtonsTallBoy on Jan 20, 2012 7:15 AM CST reply actions
The glass bulldog doesn't need your pie charts or supermetrics.
He knows that there’s nothing wrong with him that a little more intensity and grittiness can’t fix.
by FlyingSpaghettiMonster on Jan 20, 2012 8:25 AM CST up reply actions
i like your point about the stretch.
when i returned to the mound after an extended break… i had a much tougher time working from the stretch. I couldn’t even throw my splitter from it (for strikes at least)… even though i could from the windup.
Granted, jake peavy is a tad better than I was… but I bet it was a comfort thing for him, especially if he was unable to get in his side work. Is there any way to tell what pitches he got hit on? I bet he hung more sliders or something out of the stretch than he did the windup.
Kenwo4life=ratings. Just call me Mr. USA Today.
it's difficult to separate plate appearances with bases empty and runners on.
you can see the result of his pitches at texas leaguers by going to the pitch results tab.
Another Pitch F/X site you may want to add to your bookmarks
is joelefkowitz’s. His site includes more search filters, including bases occupied situations. Unfortunately, the graphs generated from that site are much more limited in the number of pitches you can display at once. And the query for bases occupied doesn’t seem to be totally functional now.
But you can see a difference in Peavy’s release point consistency for bases empty and runners on, albeit a very limited sample.
This is great, thanks for this.
I did want ask you something. Peavy seemed to have better command last year than in any other previous years. You mention that release point can affect command but can his better command be attributed to his drop in velocity? Do his pitches not have as much movement on them as they used to or did the change in his mechanics lead to better command with a less consistent release? Is he aiming too much which leads to that inconsistent release?
It came from afar and traveled sedately on, a shrug of eternity
I suppose I am talking about control
I am talking about locating pitches in the zone, leading to fewer walks. I think you know what I mean, so go ahead and correct me now if need be, so we don’t have any confusion.
It came from afar and traveled sedately on, a shrug of eternity
So if its control
My question is: Peavy seems to have an inconsistent release point which is leading to him getting shelled with runners on or more appropriately, while pitching from the stretch. larry believes (and so do I) that the inconsistent release point can negatively affect command and control. Since his BB/9 rate in 2011 was the lowest it has ever been in his career, how can we account for it when dealing with his obviously more inconsistent release point based on the graphs presented? Does the drop in both BB/9 and K/9 mean the drop in his velocity leads to his ball not moving, tailing, breaking as much, therefore making him easier to hit or is it all release point? Are his struggles from the stretch the reason for his drop in BB/9 and K/9? Will his numbers go back to where they were if he becomes more consistent with his release point in 2012 or was it due to drop in velocity?
I probably am not making a whole lot of sense here. carry on.
I am just trying to wrap my head around his statistics and how they correlate with the data presented here. I am not trying to argue or discount the research.
It came from afar and traveled sedately on, a shrug of eternity
could the drop in BB/9 be attributed to getting hit harder?
what i think i mean by that: he no longer feels comfortable in trying to nibble on the edges because the command isn’t there. when he has a runner on, he is more afraid of walking a batter, so he makes sure to hit the plate. from these two factors, he is catching the center of the plate too much which leads to hitters teeing off on him?
brndnprkns: I'm pretty sure the "badass" value of your life is closer to Gigli than The Dark Knight
by whitesoxmatt on Jan 20, 2012 9:08 AM CST up reply actions
That is a great explanation
So his drop in BB/9 could be considered a detriment to success and point to a mental issue?
It came from afar and traveled sedately on, a shrug of eternity
it could be mental as in a lack of confidence
or it could be physical due to not repeating mechanics. i’m sure it is probably some of both
brndnprkns: I'm pretty sure the "badass" value of your life is closer to Gigli than The Dark Knight
by whitesoxmatt on Jan 20, 2012 9:21 AM CST up reply actions
I think the first thing we should do is establish what command and control are.
Not trying to nitpick here, just trying to understand what you are asking. This is just my take, so anyone out there smarter than me, feel free to correct me.
Control, in my mind, is the ability of the pitcher to throw strikes basically. Basically, can he minimize walks and keep the ball in the strike zone.
Command on the other hand, would be the pitchers ability to place the ball in the proper spots (or at least where he’s aiming) inside the strikezone.
So I think I see what you are saying, Peavy’s walk rate was fantastic. However, as I’m sure we all saw, his location within the zone was usually poor, and at time very poor. My first reaction would probably be to attribute this to the little time that has passed since his surgery. It’s a pretty well known fact that TJ survivors have a much harder time regaining command and feel for their pitches than they do recovering velocity. Obviously this is a different kind of surgery and there’s not really a precedent, so I don’t really have anything to back that up, but that would be my guess. From what I saw he still seemed to have pretty good movement on his pitches, particularly his fastball (though maybe colin could give us a better idea of that from his Pitch F/X readings).
by polodude017 on Jan 20, 2012 10:02 AM CST up reply actions
do a lot of people die from tommy john surgery?
Some people get so rich they lose all respect for humanity. That's how rich I want to be.
by MarketMaker on Jan 20, 2012 11:21 AM CST up reply actions
his location or movement or something on pitches outside the zone has been a growing problem.
hitters made contact on more than 70% of the pitches they swung at that were out of the zone.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1051&position=P#platediscipline
Interesting.
My first reaction, and tell me if I’m not thinking this through right, would be that he much be leaving a lot of balls up in the zone. I wouldn’t think that leaving balls too far down, outside or inside would be much of a problem, would it? Those balls up in the zone are the ones that get you in trouble.
Those plate discipline numbers are a little baffling when I look at them. Guys were swinging at A LOT at his pitches outside the strike zone (33%, the highest of his career). I would think that’s a good thing. And his in-the-zone contact was back down again last year, which is good. However his in-the zone swing percentage and overall swing percentage were both much higher than they have been since his first couple years.
I honestly don’t know what to make of all of this, but it is interesting.
Disregard that first paragraph.
My thinking was definitely off there.
the other thing to consider is that this supports "peavy has been unlucky".
theoretically at least, the contact a batter gets on pitches out of the zone shouldn’t be as good as within the zone. as in, hitters aren’t supposed to get the barrel of the bat on those pitches.
just for a quick comparison, his 2009 BABIP on balls hit to the outfield was .484 and in 2011 it was .528. this is a subset of data that i haven’t looked at closely in the past so i’m not totally sure what is good/bad/average (not to mention park adjustments etc.) but eyeballing it that .528 seems to be high. obviously the main place to put blame on this could be his outfield defenders. on the other hand, if you believe batted ball classifications, his line drive rate spiked last season, which tends to suggest good contact and predominantly to the outfield. so that may explain the BABIP jump, too.
Thats totally what craig meant by bad luck
It came from afar and traveled sedately on, a shrug of eternity
he has lost velocity.
one thing to consider, though, is that his release point issue may be at least part of the cause of that issue.
somewhere a long haired, mt dew junky ginger is fapping
to all tese graphs
"Rhubarb, if you wouldn’t mind, ram your taint into your monitor as hard as you can." - joewho112
by BoeJouma on Jan 20, 2012 8:36 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
jeesus
do you have a camera in my parents basement? LEAVE ME ALONE
"There's too many (bleeping) guys on the computer. It's simple. I say that. Pete Rose never watched a computer. Rod Carew never did. All those hitters, they go out and see the ball, hit it and move on." - Ozzie
by usualsuspect on Jan 21, 2012 1:10 AM CST up reply actions
unrelated- Fausto Carmona Age Fraud
http://baseballmusings.com/?p=78535#comments
He might be spending the summer somewhere besides Cleveland
They should make him stay in Cleveland.
Punishment enough.
"Many people need desperately to receive this message: 'I feel and think much as you do, care about many of the things you care about, although most people do not care about them. You are not alone.'"
So if he is Roberto Hernandez Heredia
then who is Roberto Hernandez? And who is Felix Heredia?
Fausto Carmona
"People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage."
John Kenneth Galbraith
apparently, roberto hernandez heredia must have been an asshole.
because he’d been missing for a long time and nobody seemed to give a shit. i was just glad we found him.
Some people get so rich they lose all respect for humanity. That's how rich I want to be.
by MarketMaker on Jan 20, 2012 11:23 AM CST up reply actions
Some speculations
Sorry if I’m repeating some of what has already been stated.
I’m wondering where the wider pattern of release points comes from? Do these different points come late in the game (fatigue)? Or do they come (as larry notes) from frustration from having a batter(s) on base? Also, is it possible to know the result of pitches in the graphs? Was Peavy simply showing another arm slot to try & throw off hitters? (I seriously doubt Cooper would allow this)
My best guess is Jake was thinking too much. I’m assuming his mind was wrapped around prior injuries. Thus maybe the changes in release points were mental and not mechanics. I’ll further speculate that Jake will be more comfortable this season. I’d assume that Cooper and Peavy will know much more about what Jake is capable of when he’s pitching.
Great post.
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we have a full tank of gas, 1/2 pack of cigarettes...it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses.
Would Cooper allow this?
Both Contreras and El Duque were renowned for their ability to “drop down” and show different arm angles. I don’t know if Peavy was doing it on purpose, but I don’t think Cooper has any particular aversion to that sort of thing, at least if the pitcher is good at it.
by polodude017 on Jan 20, 2012 10:06 AM CST up reply actions
while larry gives credence to the mental aspect
I think he believes its more of an issue with his mechanics out of the stretch due to the Sox limiting work outside of games to allow him to be more effective or fresh in games, as he heals.
It came from afar and traveled sedately on, a shrug of eternity
yeah, I read the post he linked after commenting here.
And I’m talking out of both sides of my mouth in that I’m supposing fatigue would affect mechanics and mental which is, well, mental. I can certainly see the change from windup to stretch as being a factor. So to ask another q: is it possible to know if aberrations were from the stretch?
to polo: I’d suppose given the injury & subsequent repair Cooper would loudly oppose changing arm angles. I would think to err on the side of caution. But my suppositions are "if I were Cooper". And, as I sit here at my desk that isn’t related to baseball…
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we have a full tank of gas, 1/2 pack of cigarettes...it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses.
Just thinking of this now...
but if he was “changing his arm angle”, like on purpose to try to fool hitters, I would think the variation in release point would be much greater than what larry is showing in those graphs above. The deviation in those graphs is pretty small, relatively speaking, when you consider how far apart a guy’s release point would be if he dropping down as far as most do to “fool” hitters. So I’d probably rule that out.
by polodude017 on Jan 20, 2012 10:51 AM CST up reply actions
yah to me it looks like he dropped down one time on september 1
Kenwo4life=ratings. Just call me Mr. USA Today.
i dont think hes changing arm angle I think hes moving around the rubber.
I could see coop supporting that. esp. L/R splits.
"There's too many (bleeping) guys on the computer. It's simple. I say that. Pete Rose never watched a computer. Rod Carew never did. All those hitters, they go out and see the ball, hit it and move on." - Ozzie
by usualsuspect on Jan 21, 2012 1:14 AM CST up reply actions
i can support that, too.
as long as the pitcher can still get a consistent release point. i might have more on this later, but he does release the ball more towards the third base side when pitching against righties. which, even if you’re moving around on the rubber, shouldn’t be happening.
And my bad...
I read your comment as saying that Coop was somehow averse to that sort of thing. I get what you are saying re: dropping down in relation to the injury.
by polodude017 on Jan 20, 2012 10:54 AM CST up reply actions
didn't really articulate my feelings on him well enough on the right-rail when i said 'bad luck'.
watching him, you felt like he was pitching well, but wasn’t getting the results out of it. the disparity between wind-up vs stretch goes some way to explaining to that.
Javier Vazquez had the same issue.
He was painted as a bad-luck case due to underperforming FIP on a regular basis, but when watching how games got away from him, it was hard to feel sorry for him.
by Jim Margalus on Jan 20, 2012 2:11 PM CST up reply actions
Both Vazquez and Peavy (the last two years) could have benefitted from an earlier hook
but of course that taxes your pen, etc.
It came from afar and traveled sedately on, a shrug of eternity
Looking back at some Fangraphs splits, Peavy has struggled with BB% with men on base through his career.
While in 2011 it could be said he was a “victim” of BABIP, in 2010 his BB% shot up from 4.8 with bases empty to 12.4 with men on (15.3 w/ RISP).
2009: 6.9 up to 10.6 (8.9 w/ RISP)
2008: 8.6 down to 8.0 (12.1)
2007: 6.8 up to 8.9 (12.0)
2006: 5.1 up to 10.6 (12.6)
2005: 4.2 up to 9.4 (9.8)
2004: 6.1 up to 9.8 (12.6)
While less control is probably inherent when pitching from the stretch, some of those jumps are pretty steep. His K% stays fairly consistent in this period, while his batted ball rates are, for most part similar or better (2009 being a glaringly bad reversal of that). Since 2009 there has been a lot more inconsistency, too (along with more limited samples due to injury). So perhaps there’s no real answer to his stretch pitching; even if we get to see pre-2009 levels of Peavy, his keys to success will remain high strike-outs, keeping the ball in the yard and consistently keeping men off base. Not that that’s a new idea or anything.
Or maybe it’s mental.
The lords of dawn are men such as Mr. Lucy.
by Uribe Down on Jan 20, 2012 3:29 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
i think there might be some selection bias there.
his career LOB% is better than average. if you’re looking at all batters faced after he’s allowed somebody on base compared to the ones where there aren’t any, your additional data suggests that he’s not pitching as well since he’s already put somebody on base.
So fast he could hit a ball up the middle and it would hit him in the ass sliding into second.
by colintj on Jan 20, 2012 7:08 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Of course the data is suggesting that.
That’s why I posted it. I wasn’t comparing his LOB% to the average, I was comparing his walks (as a single indicator of his control) to the men-on-base situation. larry’s makes a good point, though. Oops.
See what happens when I baseball?
The lords of dawn are men such as Mr. Lucy.
But the effort is commendable. No snark.
"People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage."
John Kenneth Galbraith
right, but what i'm saying is that ALL pitchers will probably demonstrate the phenomenon
you document. that’s why comparing LOB% to the average is a better metric.
So fast he could hit a ball up the middle and it would hit him in the ass sliding into second.
by colintj on Jan 20, 2012 8:07 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
edit: ideally we'd compare your data to some average
but short of that, i think LOB% is likely the better indicator. without some idea of what happens on average, it’s hard to say whether he’s better or worse than usual.
So fast he could hit a ball up the middle and it would hit him in the ass sliding into second.
I gotcha.
And in a quick look at other Sox pitchers before I posted, the other pitchers did demonstrate the phenomenon, though not as drastically. ’Spose I should have mentioned or showed that.
The lords of dawn are men such as Mr. Lucy.
that'd be a good post/fanpost/long ass comment
maybe throw in, like, Verlander and Scherzer and Liriano?
So fast he could hit a ball up the middle and it would hit him in the ass sliding into second.
do what you will
you’re plenty good enough to do stats stuff.
So fast he could hit a ball up the middle and it would hit him in the ass sliding into second.
you're smart enough
and gosh darn it people like you.
by e-gus on Jan 21, 2012 3:24 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
What's the reason for the '09 fastball classifications not being as good as the '11?
Pitchf/x technology just updating that rapidly or is it due to something Texas Leaguers hasn’t done yet?
by South Side Expat on Jan 20, 2012 2:39 PM CST reply actions
iirc, it's a learning algorithm that MLBAM (the group responsible for the ID) is using
so it’s been adapting itself for a while now. don’t take my word for it though.
So fast he could hit a ball up the middle and it would hit him in the ass sliding into second.
So according to this graph, Peavy threw one pitch left-handed in 2009?
"That baseball is the smartest thing out on that field." —Hawk Harrelson
I saw that too
Maybe he fell off the mound or something obscure happened where he hung onto the ball too long. Its probably just bad data or a mistake though, right? It is funny though.
It came from afar and traveled sedately on, a shrug of eternity
thats the location in which his lat splattered to the plate.
"Rhubarb, if you wouldn’t mind, ram your taint into your monitor as hard as you can." - joewho112
.... a year early.
"Rhubarb, if you wouldn’t mind, ram your taint into your monitor as hard as you can." - joewho112
do they have data sets with raw numbers as opposed to just the graphs?
I think it could be interesting to try to run some sort of regression on these. I doubt you would get really clean numbers, but to be able to compare could be helpful.
boxcars boxcars boxcars
guess i should have spent more than 3 minutes looking.
boxcars boxcars boxcars
by soxshenanigans on Jan 20, 2012 8:04 PM CST up reply actions
I dont think the stretch versus the windup can be stressed enough
as a cause of poor pitching, mechanics or otherwise. I umpire all levels of ball up to college, and have done some semi-pro, and moving to the stretch is normally the downfall of an above average pitcher when trying to make the jump to earning a living throwing the pill. Why shouldn’t it affect a bulldo…..er hothead on the mound when he is already peaved he just gave up a hit? You would think a Cy Young award winner would have mastered that, but I guess the coop whisperer cant fix anger management.
by detailshp on Jan 21, 2012 8:21 AM CST reply actions 1 recs

by 








































