“A Radar Gun for Curveballs”
TOWER GROVE — While making phone calls today, tracking news, doing interviews, and working on a story for Sunday’s paper, I have the rebroadcast of Game 7 of the NL Championship Series going in the background. Eager to hear how Endy Chavez’s catch was called and to hear — once again — the last at-bat of the game.
By now we all have that at-bat memorized, knowing as we know our phone number the sequence of pitches Adam Wainwright threw to Carlos Beltran.
First pitch changeup. Strike looking.
Second pitch curve. Fouled off.
Third pitch curve. Watched for the pennant-winning strikeout.
The whole at-bat can be re-viewed digitally on MLB.com, and it is the technology that drives the “enhanced gameday” application that will help us all better understand what made that last pitch so darn effective. To provide the information on pitches for “enhanced gameday” three cameras are installed at the ballpark and are used to triangulate pitches — measuring location of the pitcher’s hand, the ball’s initial speed, its tilt, its break, its arrival velocity, its drop, and offering a view of type, too.
It’s what Isaac Newton would do to ESPN’s K-zone.
During the World Series, a Cardinals official told me those three cameras are being installed at ballparks around the majors. The cameras, he said, will provide more data on breaking pitches than ever available before.
“It’s like a radar gun for curve balls,” he said.
The pure speed of a fastball is enough to attract attention to a prospect, but grading a curve ball with the same raw measurements has been difficult or superficial. Watching the bend of the batter’s knees or the movement of the catcher’s mitt gives you as much information about why a curve is effective as does information like its speed, the measurement on the grade of its break, et cetera.
These cameras will offer a cornucopia of additional info by tracking hundreds and hundreds of pitches through a season.
This goes well beyond the information provided by the strikezone grids you see in scouting reports. That charts the result at the destination. These cameras help track the route taken and can be used to connect the result to that route. Baseball Prospectus made the point that the techonology could be reversed to chart the exit velocity of the ball off the bat and provide the next evolutionary leap for defensive statistics.
Fascinating.
Numbers will be available for how and when an effective curve “bites”. How the pitch(es) before it helped set up an eye level that is then exploited by the drop of a curveball. A way to project the effectiveness of a curve is one of the goals, meaning a team can trot some prospects through the big league ballpark, shoot some pictures of their breaking pitch and have a feel — really more of a theory — on which prospects have curves that rate.
It’s not a leap to expect the more that is understood about curves and their effectiveness the more links can be drawn between effective and healthy mechanics and the results. That could save some pitchers’ arms — some young pitchers’ arms.
The Cardinals have had a recent run of some of the best curves in the game, from Matt Morris to Chris Carpenter to Adam Wainwright. Not to mention relievers Tyler Johnson and Josh Kinney, whose breaking pitchers are lauded as among the best for their roles. We can see what makes them work, but not necessarily understand what makes them work. These cameras may help.
Consider some of the info already available at your local bookstore.
The latest edition of Bill James Handbook is out — Ryan Howard is on the cover — and in its pitching leaders section there is a trove of info about the Cardinals’ pitching staff. For example, Morris and Carpenter threw the highest percentage of curveballs in the National League, and Morris’ 28.6 percent was the highest in the majors, but a safe margin.
Carpenter threw 21.7 percent curves.
Some other tidbits from the Handbook to note (the last one we all should pocket and take to spring training):
… Carpenter had the fifth-lowest percentage of fastballs in the NL, throwing just 47.3 percent fastballs. Milwaukee’s Doug Davis had the lower percent (41.6).
… Three of the top seven relievers with the lowest opponent batting average vs. righthanded batters (min. 50 AB) are now Cardinals: Wainwright (.182), Jason Isringhausen (.187) and Russ Springer (.187). With Alfonso Soriano joining the division, Carlos Lee returning and Derrek Lee back from injury, that’s a stat of strength if repeated.
… James offers up a statistic labeled BPS, which is batting average plus slugging, a way to measure average and ”damage” on pitches put in play. It’s a way to understand the effectiveness of a pitcher’s curve through result — not through the ingredients of the curve — and it shows why Carpenter’s curve is considered among the best. Hitters’ BPS against Carpenter’s curve, according to the Handbook, was .504, eighth lowest in the league. Morris’ was .489.
… The leader (min. 100 batters faced) was Chicago’s Sean Marshall with .330.
… Keeping the BPS stat in mind, the pitcher with the best success with his changeup was a Cardinal starter. However, he was not the pitcher I’m listening to throw Game 7 right now. He was the Cardinal who starter Game 1. With a minimum of 100 batters faced, rookie Anthony Reyes has the best success with his changeup in the NL, and the third-lowest in the majors, according to James’ Handbook. The No. 1 changeup in baseball, no surprise, belongs to Johan Santana, whose opponents’ BPS off the changeup is .352. Reyes’ opponent BPS was .415. The next closest in the NL was Philly lefty Cole Hamels’ .451 and then the list spikes to more tha .500.
I wonder what the three cameras will tell us about a changeup. We’ll learn about the late action on pitcher’s cutter. We’ll find out just how much bite Brandon Webb’s sinker has and how he can throw a variety of sinkers to throw off hitters with speed and break. We’ll have gobs of numbers to discuss a curve, as if we pureed Robert K. Adair’s “The Physics of Baseball” with Baseball Prospectus and Christy Mathewson’s “Pitching in a Pinch”.
Adair describes a curve thusly: “This ball is throw with an initial velocity of 70 mph … to cross the plate 0.6 seconds later at a speed of about 61 mph. … Halfway from pitcher to the plate, the ball has moved about 3.4 inches from the original line of flight … From the prespective of the batter — or pitcher — the ball that started toward the inside corner has ‘curved’ 14.4 inches to pass over the outside corner.” Adair goes on to describe the how.
These new cameras may provide the why.
Why Wainwright’s curve was so effective that Beltran stood there and took it for strike 3 with the bases loaded and a ticket to the World Series in the balance.
Just heard the call of Chavez’s catch. That happened right underneath my seat out there in left field’s press box. Just a few innings earlier, Chavez had missed catching a foul flyball down the line and was none too pleased. Because sometimes we root for the story, I want to believe that added a few inches to his vertical. It was an amazing catch.
*** RIFFS ***
– Dennis Martinez was hired to be the Cardinals’ pitching coach at the new Gulf Coast League, but he’ll also be around spring training, offering advice and working with pitchers at every level.
– Since his name has been in the news recently, thought this was worth pointing out as well: From the James’ Handbook, Brad Penny had the highest average mph on his fastball this season (93.9) and he threw the most pitches above 95 mph of any pitcher (817). Obviously, he had among the highest percentage of fastballs thrown (72.6 percent of his pitches), but he also ranked highly in percentage of curves (19.0 percent).
– A law with impact on international baseball is about to reach the President’s desk, according to Baseball America. This will open the way to bringing more players to the Cardinals’ new Gulf Coast team.
– Ending his “as so often happens” moment, Chavez just popped up to end the sixth inning of Game 7. Onto the seventh and knuckle-dragging submariner Chad Bradford. Wonder what these cameras will tell us about his pitches.
-30-
Derrick Goold said he was going to Mizzou for capital-J journalism, but after growing up in the Time Zone Baseball Forgot he was really drawn to MU sitting between two major-league cities. Goold joined the Post-Dispatch in 2001 after working for The Times-Picayune and Rocky Mountain News, covering sports from LSU to NHL and every level of baseball in between. 
Derrick,
I just realized that pitchers and catchers report in, what, seven weeks or so? Anyway, amid the McGwire voting and talk, I was just mulling that Larry Walker probably won’t be voted into the HOF, and wondered what kind of career BA guarantees admission. I was looking at the career leaders on baseball-reference.com, where after Cobb, Hornsby and Joe Jackson, fourth place belongs to Lefty O’Doul at .349, an amazing story who washed out as a pitcher by age 26, but returned to the majors after a five-year layoff at 31 to deliver six dominant seasons. Staying on topic, ODoul’s baseball-reference page was sponsored by the Almost Hall of Fame (link below). Since you like statistical research, they have some on what they call the “spinach page.” You seem to know all the obscure baseball sites, but it might making an interesting topic on some cold January day when you’re pining for the hockey beat.
The top 100 all-time in BA go down to about .310. It’s interesting to who among the top 100 isn’t in the HOF (Walker is 81st at .313), and who among active players is on the list, only seven: 27th Todd Helton at .333, 30th Albert Pujols at .332, 33rd Ichiro Suzuki at .331, 43rd Vladimir Guerrero (tied at 43rd with Joltin’ Joe DiMaggio) at .3246, 57th Nomar Garciaparra at .318, 67th Derek Jeter at .317, 75th Manny Ramirez at .314.
http://www.almosthalloffame.org/index.html
Fuhrig,
While we know 3,000 hits and 300 wins gain admission and 500 home runs eventually gains admission, I have never heard a career batting average expressed as a golden ticket to Cooperstown. A career average better than .300 is considered exceptional, but not Hall-of-Fame automatic. Larry Walker is just one example of that.
When Walker hinted that he would retire when the 2005 season ended — whenever that was — I started doing some research on his Hall of Fame credentials. First and foremost, his Hall of Fame cred should be heightened by the fact that he’s the best player ever produced by a country, Canada. That has to be worth something, right?
But here is another thing that caught me eye, and I wrote about it the night that Walker retired:
Walker is one of those 18. He should be the 15th, you figure in the Hall.
Thanks for the link.
dg
-30-
Categorizing the pitches thrown would seem to be an inexact science, at best. From my limited experience, most pitchers throw variations of every pitch. A 90 mph fastball (ok, in my case, a 60 mph fastball) gripped and released slightly differently becomes a “cutter” with 5 mph less velocity - so is it a fastball or a breaking ball? I always marvel at watching Greg Maddux pitch, as I can see multiple types of fastballs at different speeds - but when does a fastball with 10 mph taken off become a changeup?
The ability of technology here is amazing, and it’s changing the game. In pre-video days, hitters could only review what they’d personally seen. In the 60’s through 90’s hitters could watch video, but the angles were mostly just helpful. With the technology available now, there should be fewer suprised hitters.
It really makes you appreciate hitters like Musial even more for being able to rarely ever be fooled by a pitcher he couldn’t study. Conversely, it makes one appreciate today’s pitchers even more - guys who rack up strokeouts and hitless innings even though other teams study every pitch they’ve thrown.
I always enjoy your work. Thanks!
Just a list of Walker’s career achievements:
– Five-time all-star (imagine how many had he been in NY, LA or Boston)
– 1997 NL MVP
– Seven gold gloves (should be a big, big HOF factor for a dominant hitter)
– Three batting titles
– In both 1997 and 1999, he led the NL in both on-base and slugging percentage. Sort of a productivity double-crown. He had six seasons for each stat ranking in the top five in the league.
– 1997 home run title. 383 career homers (51st all-time).
– 11 seasons with double-digit stolen bases. 230 career steals.
Of course, people downgrade Walker’s production because he played in Colorado. I’m waiting for them to downgrade the career achievements of Ruth and Gehrig, DiMaggio, Ted Williams, Manny Ramierez and David Ortiz, Ernie Banks, etc., because they played in the cheese-box confines popularly know as Yankee Stadium, Fenway Park and Wrigley Field. An all around player like Walker who hit for average and power, could steal bases and was a superb fielder would have excelled anywhere. If not for his bad neck and knees, or if he had lacked the pride to keep hanging around for a few years, maybe as DH in the American League just to pad his career stats, Walker could have reached 400-plus HRs, maybe 450 with a little good health. The Hall of Fame in many people’s (subconscious) interpretation is becoming an award for longevity, preferably during periods of offensive/HR excess. A little fielding and base running should go a long way. If 500 HR or 3,000 hits (Palmeiro) or 300 wins (Gaylord Perry, Don Sutton) gets you in as a DH or a ball doctor, then hitting career .300 should pretty much make you a candidate who has to be knocked down on the basis of some other flaws. How many gold gloves would make you a likely HOFer regardless of offense? Derrick makes an interesting Canadian nationalism argument. Is Walker the Canadian Clemente? He was a five-tool player…
I always like to counter the problem of good not great players piling up career numbers through longevity (an admirable thing, but not the only thing) by posing the hit-by-a-train question. If a given active player were to stop playing suddenly, mid-career, by choice, injury or death (a la Jim Brown/Tiki Barber, Albert Belle/Roy Campenella, Clemente) would he be a Hall of Famer right now? It can be a bit ghoulish, but it helps put dominance and greatness versus longevity into perspective.
Tell me what are the major holdups/obsticles to the following series of events.
1. Trade Looper to the Phillies for Lieber- fills to gaping holes for each club
2. Sign Jeff Weaver- I’m convinced after post-season success
3. Move Wainwright to the rotation- Should be dominant
4. Trade Anthony Reyes and Juan Encarnacion to the D’Rays for Carl Crawford- Good deal for both clubs
5. Move Chris Duncan to right- He’s a liability wherever you put him in the outfield, but think of the everyday lineup that woudl result. Wow
So tell me why this won’t happen
Gov,
1. Philly had interest in Looper a year ago, so this isn’t as outlandish as perceived. But the Phillies need a bat for their lineup, and that’s what they’ve be looking to get in return for Lieber.
2. Most possible of the things you suggest.
3. The adjective “dominant” should not be thrown around so freely, but it makes sense to me that Adam Wainwright is best used by the Cardinals as a starter.
4. Um … Carl Crawford is one of the most coveted outfielders in the majors. See how many steals he had last season? Think of how many runs he could score for a winning team? Sorry, an average right fielder coming off wrist surgery and a pitcher with one injury-free season in his recent life isn’t going to land you Carl Crawford.
5. La Russa has often talked about Duncan being more comfortable in right field than left. Encarnacion is the better choice there, but this would not be a surprising experiment for the Cardinals during spring.
Hope that helps,
dg
-30-
I keep hearing that Duncan is more comfortable in right. Can somebody explain that? I always thought that the better fielder generally goes to right over left field, partly for the arm strength needed to keep runners from going first to third or stretching doubles into triples, compared to the much shorter throw to third base from left. For similar reasons, you also want better speed in right to get to balls quicker. Also, Duncan didn’t exactly look comfortable in right field during game five of the World Series.
We all like Duncan, but I still feel like he and the Cardinals are both better served if he can be traded to an AL team where he can play first base or DH, in return for a solid outfielder or, as always, pitching. Hmm, Tampa Bay had Travis Lee and Jonny Gomes as ‘06 starters at those two positions (according to baseball-reference.com), and neither broke .225.
Your boss Bernie M has it all wrong. A vote against McGwire isn’t a vote against McGwire. It is a vote against Bonds - who sportwriters dislike. But they can’t vote against Bonds without first voting against McGwire or they will be subject to criticism. So they vote against McGwire so they can pave the way for their future vote against Bonds with a clear conscience.
Fuhrig,
It’s a fine question. Also consider that a majority of players in the majors are still righthanded, as are most pitchers. Most of Duncan’s early time as an outfielder was in right field and all that has contributed to where he is most comfortable reading the flight of the ball. We all saw how there were repeated times in left field where he had trouble reading the ball off the bat and played some line drives into doubles. Jeff Suppan was usually pitching.
Joe,
Don’t buy it. Not at all. So many voters that I have spoken to say they won’t for Mark McGwire because the hint of steroids calls his Hall of Fame credentials into question. Those same voters say they will vote for Barry Bonds because he had a Hall of Fame career before he allegedly turned to steroids, according to the various reports. So, nope. Your comment starts wrong — Bernie Miklasz is our paper’s sports columnist, not the sports editor and not the boss — and before veering back in that direction peaks with your statement “who sportswriters dislike”. That is true. Many sportswriters do not like Bonds.
When choosing awards, I’ve voted for people I don’t necessarily like.
There is a difference between undeserving and undesirable.
dg
-30-
My apologies for my ignorance on org chart for the PD. Please excuse that blunder.
I can’t phathom how voters can rationalize their vote as your statement indicates. Bonds “had a hall career BEFORE he …” began to cheat, so he is entitled. Using that rationale, Pete Rose had a Hall career if you exclude the games he bet on didn’t he? You don’t see that as heavy rationalizing by the folks with whom you have spoken?