Pena  1.0 IP 0H 0R 0ER 0BB 1K

Expecting to see the usual hilarity that ensues when a position player takes the mound (a la Jamie Burke), I queued up Pena’s inning on MLB.TV.

Wow. Instead of poorly-placed, low-80’s junk, Pena was bringing it. The offensively- challenged shortstop hit the low-90’s on several occasions, and even mixed in a few curveballs. Intrigued by Pena’s performance, I decided to take a look at his Pitch F/X data for the outing.

The chart shows the vertical and horizontal movement (in inches) that Pena Jr. got on his pitches, relative to a pitch thrown without spin. The X axis shows the amount of horizontal movement on Tony’s pitches, while the Y axis shows the amount of vertical movement on the pitches. The chart is from the view of the catcher, so pitches with a negative horizontal (X axis) value are tailing in on a righthanded hitter. Pitches with a low vertical (Y axis) value are moving down in the strike zone; the lower the Y value, the more downward movement the pitch has.

Type      MPH      X(In.)      Z(In.)      #Thrown

FB          90.2      -7.90     3.90        8

CB         75.9        7.76      0.09       4

Type is the type of pitch thrown. FB=Fastball, CB=Curveball. MPH is the average initial velocity of the pitch. X is the amount of horizontal movement on the pitch. Remember, a negative X value means the pitch is moving toward a righthanded batter. Z is the amount of vertical movement on the pitch. The lower the Z value, the more downward movement on the pitch. #Thrown is the number of times that Pena threw each pitch.

Color me impressed. The career .236/.255/.316 hitter ramped his heater into the low-90’s, with an average velocity of 90.2 MPH. In addition, the pitch had plenty of tailing action in on Tiger righthanders (-7.90 X) with sinking action to boot (3.90 Z).

Pena’s “slurve” broke away quite a bit from righthanders (7.76 X) while also displaying some tilting action (0.09 Z). Pena actually caught Tigers backstop Ivan Rodriguez looking on a sweeping breaking ball. Pena can now say that he struck out a future hall of famer.

This “analysis” is mostly tongue-in-cheek, but it does at least make you wonder if Pena Jr. would be more serviceable as a reliever than as a shortstop. One of the Royals announcers even alluded to Rafael Betancourt, a converted shortstop who has gone on to have a successful major league career as a fastball-oriented reliever. Sure, it’s an apples-to-oranges comparison (Betancourt began that transition in 1997 in the minors, made stops in Japan and suffered through injury woes), but the premise is still the same as we have seen from other converts: Pena Jr. just not going to hit enough to play, so why not give that live arm a shot on the mound? 

Let’s face it, Pena Jr. cannot hit. At all. With zero pop (.80 ISO), patience (17 career walks) or contact ability (16.6 K%), he’s going to have to cover an ungoldy amount of territory to be worth employing on a regular basis. The pitching sample size is incredibly small, but I’m sure that some members of the Royals organization are at least pondering the idea of letting Pena Jr. unleash some high heat, as opposed to making a futile attempt to hit it.

David Golebiewski is a contributing writer for Driveline Mechanics, The Transaction Guy on the MVN Network, and Inside Edge Scouting Services. David is a Journalism major at Duquesne University. To contact David, drop a line at david@drivelinemechanics.com or golebie1029@duq.edu

a

Is Tony Pena Jr. the next Rafael Betancourt?

So, in other words, don’t expect any substantive updates from me in the near future! Hopefully the new writers will hold down the fort before we transition to the SB Nation network.

a

News: Period of Absence

I guess to put it bluntly, my official qualifications/experience are nill.  I’m a baseball nut who has spent borderline unhealthy amounts of time watching baseball and reading anything and everything I can get.  So much so it has extended into my “real” life as I’m minoring in statistics solely to understand the methods behind the more advanced metrics.  Posting here will be my first regular contribution to a site; I’m sure I’ll take my lumps but we’ll all get through it here.

Unofficially however, I have been able to watch scores of games with professional amateur scouts to get a peek into that world over the past few years.  I’m not even going to begin to say I’m on the level of some of the experienced scouts—the best way I can describe to you the depth of what some of these guys know and see is that they are just watching a different game from everyone else—but I do have a pretty good feel for the game.

That’s really all I have for now, hopefully posting real analysis will be a better intro to what I bring to the table.

a

A little about myself…#2

You can learn a lot just by looking.

a

HR Derby: Josh Hamilton

Problem was, the scouting report on Pelfrey entering the 2008 campaign read entirely like the pre-draft 2005 report: an enticing sinker, but little in the way of secondary offerings. Pelfrey scrapped his curveball in favor of a slider, but neither breaking ball showed much promise and his changeup was rarely utilized. A one-trick pitcher, Pelfrey produced middling results with the Mets in 2006 and 2007:

‘06: 21.1 IP, 5.49 ERA, 5.54 K/9, 5.11 BB/9, 54 GB%

‘07: 72.2 IP, 5.57 ERA, 5.61 K/9, 4.86 BB/9, 49 GB%

2008 also started out inauspiciously for Pelfrey, as he slogged through the first two months of the season with middling peripherals. However, since the calender turned to June, Pelfrey has performed considerably better…

April/May: 56 IP, 4.98 ERA, 4.66 K/9, 4.01 BB/9, 1.35 GB/FB

June/July: 52.2 IP, 2.24 ERA, 6.03 K/9, 3.10 BB/9, 2.46 GB/FB

His peripherals aren’t top shelf, mind you, but he’s whiffing almost a batter and a half per 9 more while walking almost one less, while also inducing a ton of grounders.

In other words, everything is trending up for Pelfrey. Is his improvement simply a sample-size mirage, or is his performance predicated on changes in his pitch selection and quality? To find out, I am going to examine Pelfrey’s Pitch F/X data, splitting the data into two groups: Bad Pelfrey (April/May) and Good Pelfrey (June/July), comparing the two to see any noted changes in pitch caliber and repertoire. If Pelfrey is indeed doing something different over the past two months, perhaps his improvement is legitimate, indicative of a matured pitcher better utilizing his talents. Conversely, if the two sets appear the same, perhaps he’s just going through an aberrant stretch and is destined to return to his previous level of performance.

Bad Pelfrey (April/May)

The chart shows the vertical and horizontal movement (in inches) that Pelfrey got on his pitches, relative to a pitch thrown without spin. The X axis shows the amount of horizontal movement on Pelfrey’s pitches, while the Y axis shows the amount of vertical movement on the pitches. The chart is from the view of the catcher, so pitches with a negative horizontal (X axis) value are tailing in on a righthanded hitter. Pitches with a low vertical (Y axis) value are moving down in the strike zone; the lower the Y value, the more downward movement the pitch has.

Pitch      MPH         X(In.)        Z(In.)        %Thrown

FB           92.73      -8.75       8.54           77.5

SL           84.67      -0.36       4.35           16.6

CH          83.16      -9.92       5.39            5.9

Type is the type of pitch thrown. FB=Fastball, SL=Slider, CH=Changeup. MPH is the average initial velocity of the pitch. X is the amount of horizontal movement on the pitch. Remember, a negative X value means the pitch is moving toward a righthanded batter. Z is the amount of vertical movement on the pitch. The lower the Z value, the more downward movement on the pitch. %Thrown is the percentage that Pelfrey threw each pitch.

Pelfrey is obviously a fastball-first pitcher, and that trend was still evident in April and May. The 6-7 righty threw his heater 77.5% of the time, at an average velocity of 92.73 MPH. Pelfrey got plenty of arm-side run on the pitch (-8.75 X), tailing the fastball in on righties. For comparison, the average fastball gets about -5.46 inches of horizontal break.

The slider was Pelfrey’s most used secondary offering (16.6%). The pitch left something to be desired, as it possessed neither great horizontal movement away from rightanded batters ( at -0.36 X, it was actually slightly in on righties) or downward tilt (4.35 Z). This has long been Pelfrey’s bane: impressive as his fastball is (and it’s a plus offering), his breaking ball had just been a “show-me” pitch.

Pelfrey’s changeup was another modest offering in the early months of the season. The difference in velocity between his heater and his change was average (9.57 MPH), and the pitch featured a little bit of “fading” action away from lefties (-9.92 X, compared to -8.75 X for the fastball). The vertical difference between the fastball and changeup was also nothing special (5.39 Z on change; 8.54 Z on fastball). Perhaps realizing the average-ness of the pitch, Pelfrey only used his change 5.9% of the time.

Pelfrey’s April and May looked largely like what we have seen from him over the past few seasons: A good fastball with plenty of tailing action, but a slurvy breaking ball that catches the plate and a shoulder shrug-inducing change.

Good Pelfrey (June/July)

Pitch      MPH      X(In.)      Z(In.)      %Thrown

FB          93.9      -8.09     7.08          84.4  

SL         85.41      0.74      3.89           9.9

CH        84.17     -9.14      5.33           4.4

CB         74.41     3.71      -2.63          1.3

(CB=Curveball)

So, what does Pelfrey (who some would say relies too much on his heater) do during the best stretch of his professional career? He throws more heaters, of course. Already heavily reliant on his fastball over the first two months, Pelfrey actually increased his percentage of cheese 6.9%, from 77.5% to 84.4%. He’s also throwing the pitch harder as of late, with an average fastball velocity of 93.9 MPH (a 1.17 MPH increase). With that increase in speed has come a reduction in horizontal movement (-8.09 X in June/July, compared to -8.75 X in April/May). It appears as though Pelfrey has made a decision to increase the velocity on his heater at the expense of some movement. This would appear to be a worthwhile swap: the pitch still has plenty of tailing action and now batters have even less reaction time to put the bat on the ball.

Pelfrey’s slider has shown slight improvement over his hot streak. He’s throwing the pitch a bit harder (85.41 MPH), with greater horizontal movement away from righties (0.74 X) and better tilt (3.89 X). No one will ever confuse his slider with Brad Lidge’s, but Pelfrey’s recent incarnation of the pitch is at least a step in the right direction. Despite the seeming gains, Pelfrey has utilized the pitch less often in June/July (9.9%).

Little has changed regarding Pelfrey’s changeup; it’s still just sort of there. Perhaps not concidentally, the already scarcely-used pitch has seen a slight reduction in appearance (4.4%).

Well, look at that- the curveball has returned from the dead. He hasn’t thrown the pitch terribly often, mind you, but Pelfrey is beginning to re-introduce the pitch into his repertoire: 1 yellow hammer in his June 27th start against the Yankees, and five apiece over his last two starts against the Giants and Rockies. Pelfrey will likely always rely predominantly on his fastball, but it can’t hurt to give batters another pitch to think about.

In conclusion, “Good Pelfrey” has made several changes from “Bad Pelfrey”:

- Increased fastball usage, trading some movement for velocity

- Modest improvement on the slider

- Re-introduction of the previously scrapped curveball

Whether these recent trends continue remains to be seen, but Pelfrey appears to have made a few alterations to his pitching style over the past two months that bode well for his long-term development. With Pedro Martinez’s achy shoulder, Oliver Perez’s erratic nature and John Maine’s occasional hiccups, the Mets surely could use the more recent version of Mike Pelfrey, the one the team envisioned upon drafting him three years ago.

David Golebiewski is a contributing writer for Driveline Mechanics and The Transaction Guy on the MVN Network. Contact David at david@drivelinemechanics.com

a

Has Mike Pelfrey turned the corner? A Pitch F/X analysis

What does this mean for you? Well, for starters, to comment you’ll now need to register an account at SB Nation - but don’t worry, it’s really easy. Driveline Mechanics will also see an increase in traffic through the other partners in the SB Nation network, and the backend of the software should be easier to maintain and work with. You’ll also get the option of Fanposts, where you get to post to a separate page with your thoughts about all things baseball. It’s like a user’s blog within the blog - and valued contributors to Fanposts may see their work promoted to the main page, or possibly brought on to the staff as a part-time writer!

The one problem in moving over to the SB Nation Network is that they don’t have a migration tool to move our WordPress articles over to the new content site. However, copying and pasting the finished product works rather well using through rich text editor, so manually migrating articles won’t be a problem. I plan on copying over the more interesting articles on a periodic basis so new users can see them and so I can revisit my analysis, but if there’s something you specifically want to see (or can’t live without), please comment to this post and let us know so we can mark it for migration.

To all the users who comment on posts and read the site on a regular basis: Thanks - we couldn’t have done it without you. Traffic stats and the number of comments left on the site helped convinced Tyler Bleszinski (President of SB Nation) to add our site to his network, so you played a big role in this.

I can’t believe that we’ve only been up for two months or so and we’re seeing such major changes - three new writers hired on, moving to a new network, and lots of interest from the readers about pitching mechanics in general. Though I knew there was a big hole in the Internet when Carlos Gomez stopped writing over at The Hardball Times, I guess I drastically underestimated the baseball fanatics out there who cared about this niche.

In my opinion, I see the video analysis of pitching/hitting mechanics from a scientific and performance point of view as the next Moneyball frontier where “nerds” like myself are looked down upon by front office types and scouts because we never played the game at a high enough level to understand. However, just like it’s impossible to tell the difference between a .360 OBP and .375 OBP hitter with the naked eye (even if you watched all 162 games), it is impossible to tell what the pitcher’s arm is doing without slow-motion (and ideally high-speed) video from various angles. The human eye can only see at 30 frames per second, while capturing the relevant data from a pitcher’s delivery takes several hundred frames per second for the most accurate analysis. Hopefully with time and the dissemination of information by sites like Saber-Scouting, Driveline Mechanics, and The Hardball Times (even though we all disagree on some things), front offices and scouts will start to accept the fact that Rick Peterson was right about at least this one thing:

“In God we trust; all others must have data.”

a

News: We’re Moving!

For the past two years, I have contributed to Most Valuable Network, first for the Pittsburgh Lumber Company (a Pirates-centric blog) and most recently for The Transaction Guy, a blog that breaks down and analyzes the most prominent transactions from around the league. In addition to feeding my baseball addiction, I am currently enrolled at Duquesne University as a Journalism major.

For Driveline Mechanics, I will be contributing transaction analysis, along with analysis of Pitch F/X data.

I really look forward to providing some additional thoughts to this already outstanding site. If anyone would like to contact me, whether to suggest an idea for a post or for any other reason, email me at david@drivelinemechanics.com 

Thanks,

David Golebiewski

a

A little about myself…

• Josh Kalk - Pitch f/x Analyst
• Nick Mueller - Performance Analyst
• David Golebiewski - Transactions Analyst

You may know some of these authors - Josh writes for The Hardball Times and David writes for Most Valuable Network, both doing similar work as they will be doing here.

They will be making individual posts in the coming days to introduce themselves and what their backgrounds are. Thanks to everyone who applied, as I received a huge turnout from the readers, for which I am very appreciative of!

There is big news coming in the next week or two (besides my wedding, my honeymoon, my trip back to Cleveland, moving into a new house..) that I think all the readers are going to be very excited about. Unfortunately I can’t divulge it just yet, but after all the behind-the-scenes work is done, you’ll be the first to know.

a

Welcome New Hires!

When I solicited your views for the Rich Harden trade, the responses were varied amongst both Cubs and A’s fans. Make no bones about it - the A’s dealt a high-risk but high-impact player in Rich Harden and received a group of mediocre to above-average talent blocked at most positions in the Cubs’ system. However, is this such a bad thing? Remember that Harden hasn’t thrown 200 innings in his professional career ever, and the last two years he has lost significant time to injury. As a result, Rich Harden is no longer throwing a breaking ball, instead becoming a two-pitch (fastball/changeup) pitcher. How he gets it done with just two pitches as a starter is beyond me, but it is a testament to his amazing ability.

Let’s take a look at the pros and cons of the package, and as a bonus, we’ll take a look at Sean Gallagher’s pitching mechanics - pulled straight from his recent start for Oakland, where he led the A’s to victory over division rival Los Angeles of Anaheim, striking out seven in his debut…

Dave Cameron of Fangraphs wrote an excellent piece about exchanging Rich Harden for Sean Gallagher here. In it, he makes some solid points about the durability of Gallagher vs. Harden and what would happen should Harden go down. Comparing Harden + his replacement to Sean Gallagher looks something like this:

That brings the combined totals for Harden + Harden Replacements to 180 innings with a 4.25 FIP, compared to the 180 innings we were projecting from Gallagher at a 5.00 FIP. That’s a difference of three-fourths of a run per nine innings, which while significant, adds up to a grand total of about 15 runs over the course of an entire season.

Fifteen runs, or roughly 1.5 wins - that’s the entirety of downgrading from Rich Harden to Sean Gallagher, based on the assumptions I made above. If you don’t like the numbers I used, feel free to plug in your own, but unless you’re very bullish on Harden’s health, you’re going to come to the conclusion that the swap will cost the A’s at most two or three wins between now and the end of 2009, when Harden’s contract expires.

For giving up those two to three wins in the next year and a half, the A’s receive club control over Gallagher from 2010 to 2013 (his ‘08-’09 years are already counted above), control over Murton from 2008 to 2011, control over Patterson from 2008 to 2014, a potentially useful prospect in Josh Donaldson, and they save approximately $8 million in salary.

If you assume that Cameron’s numbers are right (and I do), the A’s trade two to three wins for a ton of cost-saving prospects and league-ready players in addition to dumping $8mm in salary. This is a great trade by any measure! However, the problem lies in the fact that Rich Harden’s star power far outweighs what the A’s will get in Murton/Gallagher/Patterson/Donaldson, and that’s what’s blinding people. For those of you who have read Moneyball (and I hope that’s all of you), it is important to remember what Beane said about trading for and replacing players:

It’s not important to recreate the individual. It’s important to recreate the aggregate.

Beane said that regarding the loss of Jason Giambi, another high-profile player with stellar on-base and slugging percentages that couldn’t be replaced by any one single player. However, by choosing the undervalued parts that Beane could control, he was able to compete without one of the best players in the American League by adding Scott Hatteberg and Jeremy Giambi. Rich Harden is impossible to replace - but the package the A’s received in return does a good job of recreating the aggregate while saving the club money and giving them control over more pre-arbitration players who are league-ready.

A Closer Look at the Return

We’ll focus on two major players in the return - OF Matt Murton and RHP Sean Gallagher. Matt Murton is something of a pariah in Chicago, never getting playing time in the crowded outfield despite excellent on-base percentages in addition to a little pop from time to time. Though Murton has a line drive stroke and hasn’t shown the propensity to hit 25+ HR per year, he is a finished product that adds quite a bit of value to Oakland. His career batting line in the MLB is .294/.362/.448 and the average left fielder’s batting line is .264/.344/.441. All signs point to Matt Murton being a perfectly league-average (or slightly better) left fielder, both offense and defense considered. When you can get this production for close to the league minimum, you should be pretty damn happy.

Additionally, Matt Murton has never played full-time since 2005, and he is probably quite happy to be in a situation where his talents are appreciated. He will get a chance to play full-time in Oakland’s sparse outfield, probably joining the ranks of Carlos Gonzalez and Travis Buck in the long-run, while the other reserves scramble for playing time (Denorfia, Sweeney, Brown, etc).

RHP Sean Gallagher is the real return piece that people want to look at, especially after his great debut in Oakland last night. Gallagher combines a 93-96 mph four-seam fastball with a two-seam sinker, a straight change, devastating 12-6 curveball, and a newly added slider. Here’s what his Pitch f/x player card looks like, courtesy of Josh Kalk of The Hardball Times:

As you can see, Gallagher works like most RHP - primarily fastball/change to LH batters and fastball/slider to RH batters. He throws his curveball to both batters with some regularity, though, which is a testament to his confidence in the pitch in addition to the quality of the late break. I like his approach, as he throws a significant percentage of fastballs to both hitters and trusts his best pitches, rather than dabbling in a lot of off-speed work.

In 2008, Sean Gallagher spent 29 innings in AAA, striking out 30 batters, walking only 9 and giving up 2 home runs. His career in the minors has been a major success - he has struck out just over a batter per inning (482 K in 480 IP) and has shown major durability despite large jumps in innings pitched (Gallagher threw 151 innings at age 19 and 164 innings at age 20 - both high totals for such a young pitcher).

Complaints about Gallagher tend to focus on the same things - his mild velocity (prior to his jump in fastball velocity in 2006) and his bad body (6′2″ 220 lbs). Sounds a lot like Dana Eveland, doesn’t it? Though Gallagher has a reputation for running out of steam late in the season, there is the fact that he is just 22 years old and the Cubs have imposed a large amount of innings on his young arm - something they are unfortunately known for doing despite history indicating that it might not be such a great idea. For my money’s worth, I see a pitcher with an above-average fastball and curve who has been durable and strikes out a ton of batters with a mild control problem (though it is trending down, a very good sign).

Gallagher’s Mechanics

Thanks to reader xv84, I’ve figured out how to synchronize and combine two pitches from the same pitcher. I won’t waste any time showing you it, because it’s positively awesome:

This is a sequence of Sean Gallagher vs. Chone Figgins in the first inning of the A’s / Angels game yesterday. Gallagher ran a fastball in on Figgins at 95 mph on an 0-1 count, speeding his hands up, then threw a nasty looping curveball on the outside corner of the plate nearly 20 mph slower, sitting him down. Poor Figgins never had a chance.

However, there are a few things I don’t like in Gallagher’s delivery. The first is the timing of his pitching arm at footstrike. Compare James Shields to Sean Gallagher in these two images - right when both pitchers start to turn their shoulders:

As you can see, Gallagher’s arm is not vertical when the shoulders turn. However, neither is it below the horizontal plane of his acromial line, so it’s not terrible. However, this will increase the distance that the forearm lays back in external rotation and will increase the load on his ulnar collateral ligament (UCL).

Tempo-wise, Gallagher is a lightning-fast 16 frames from maximal leg lift into footplant, which is excellent. Nothing to change here! Furthermore, Gallagher features the late stepover into footplant that I like, as it aids in fast rotation of the hips ahead of the shoulders:

Gallagher significantly “scap” loads his arm behind his back, but keeps the elbow at or below the level of the shoulders. He has a great high glove finish at the shoulder in the deceleration phase:

He does feature a bit of pitching arm recoil, but his arm does a pretty good job of uniformly decelerating across his body, so I think it’s fine for the most part.

Overall, though I don’t like his timing at footstrike/shoulder turn, Gallagher has otherwise pretty solid mechanics. I’d rate them at a tick above average, or Good.

In conclusion, I think the A’s got a good deal. That’s not to say that the Cubs got a poor return, since Patterson is blocked by Theriot/Fontenot/Derosa, Donaldson is blocked by Soto, Murton is hated by the organization, and Gallagher is nothing more than a fourth/fifth starter to the Cubs, depending on Rich Hill’s ability to throw strikes. Both teams did well here, and I just don’t understand the people that say that Oakland got ripped off here.

a

Trade Analysis: Rich Harden (analysis of Sean Gallagher, too!)

Not to tip my hand too much, but I’m planning on adding writers for the following subjects:

• In-depth weekly Pitch f/x analysis
• Weekly transaction reports around the league
• Standard sabermetric analysis of players and teams
• Pitching/hitting mechanics intern

Thanks again for your response, and keep those emails coming!

a

News: Hiring Process