It has been a quiet few days in the transactional world, but there are plenty of interesting things being written with possible implications for the player market. Here are a few pieces well worth a read:
- ESPN.com’s Keith Law (Insider link) takes a look at players who entered camp with notable tweaks to their respective games, rounding up the impressions of scouts from around the game. Diamondbacks righty Taijuan Walker is said to have impressed with his latest mechanical overhaul, and he’s showing improved fastball command along with a sharper cut fastball. For White Sox shortstop Tim Anderson, the change has come more on the mental side; it seems he’s improving his ability to recognize pitches and decide whether to swing. The results haven’t been all that promising for Cubs outfielder Jason Heyward, Law suggests, who still seems to lack bat speed despite a newly reworked swing.
- R.J. Anderson of CBS Sports writes about the sources of the data that we read so much about. Beyond the obvious and well-known sources, there’s also a cottage industry of individuals and small companies who sell various kinds of information to ballclubs. While burgeoning in-house analytical departments have obviated the need for certain third-party services, the appetite for data has led to new avenues. It’s a fascinating and lengthy look at this important topic that you’ll want to read in full.
- With research from Willie Harrison and John Salmon suggesting that the home-team advantage shows up most prominently in the poor performances of visiting starters in the first inning, Dave Cameron of Fangraphs examines the possible implications. Cameron suggests that there could be merit to the idea of utilizing a reliever to throw an inning to open games for visiting teams, before turning things over to the “starter” in the bottom of the second. While that’d be a tough strategy to implement over most of the season, it could be of greater function when rosters expand or during the postseason.
- For individual pitchers, we know that stuff doesn’t always equate to results. Eno Sarris of Fangraphs addresses that general topic by looking closely at the differing 2016 seasons put up by Reds pitchers Cody Reed and Dan Straily (the latter of whom has since been traded to the Marlins). Sarris’s breakdown suggests that predictability — or, the lack thereof — is an important ingredient for a major league pitcher, regardless of what kind of raw offerings he possesses. For Straily, being able to throw offspeed pitches for strikes in hitters’ counts last year was an important part of his renaissance. In Reed’s case, Sarris discovers, he relied too heavily not just on his fastball, but in throwing it to a certain spot (outer half). Be sure to check out the full piece for all the details and nuance in the analysis.
ronaldreagan
Heyward is gonna do a triple crown, probably
GeauxRangers
Ha
Alstad
Yaaaaaaa. No
chesteraarthur
LOB, GIDP, & soft contact % triple crown.
metseventually 2
Damn, thanks for the lol
sufferforsnakes
Triple Crown Royal?
thebare
You cub fan thought EJax Edwin Jackson was are highest paid mistake but if Heyward can’t do it by July don’t let him hold The younger stars back you to Zoo
Mikel Grady
3 World Series rings? Sounds good
CompanyAssassin
I don’t think that’s what he meant..
ChiSoxCity
The Cubs should cut their losses with Heyward as soon as possible. Massive waste of money for the easiest out in baseball.
Dock_Elvis
Doesn’t look that fast….I’ll take him at the Derby maybe but its tough to finish off the Belmont…..oh..yoou meant baseball..my bad.
ChiSoxCity
Yeah, Cubs not horses…
CubsFanFrank
It wasn’t long ago that Heyward was tabbed as the second coming of Rickey Henderson. Though it appears as though that ship has sailed far, far away, his defense makes it easier to swallow, especially when at the bottom 3rd of a lineup like that of the Cubs.
lowtalker1
The fact that people thought he was good. I never saw this hype he had in Atlanta. Over rated
zwmartin
What? Ricky Henderson? They don’t profile at all.
bruinsfan94 2
The thing about starting a game with a reliveor is the stupidest thing I have ever heard anyone say, and we all dumber now for having read it. Your better then that Jeff.
Priggs89
I really, REALLY hope all the misspellings were intentionally part of the joke.
stl_cards16 2
* reliever
* and we ARE all dumber
* you’re
*than
Might want to brush up on 4th grade English before talking about how stupid something is.
elscorchot
Haha
sufferforsnakes
It was Dave Cameron who came up with that, not Jeff.
jdgoat
I do t know if I’d agree with it, but you can’t say it’s stupid when it’s never been tried. I guess the research shows starters are at their worst then, so let a good reliever get out their best hitters. And if the starter is dealing on that day, it would be much easier to let him finish the game
darkstar61
If you read the article its not even that starters are “at their worst then.” In fact, it is only addressing Away Starters, not starters as a whole.
The theory is quite simple; it’s that Away Starters are doing all their warming up prior to the game then having to sit on the bench while their club is up. That sitting is seemingly showing up in their first inning results while Home starters don’t have that disadvantage.
crashdavis
And if you read the article or at least the last sentence of the paragraph you’d realize it’s a pretty solid idea.
vtadave
You expect him to actually read the article?
Dookie Howser, MD
I kind of like the idea of a reliever to start the game. Top of the order would be up, so it is a “high leverage” situation in some ways….
Dock_Elvis
Issue is if you use the closer he’s gone if you need him late. It’d stretch a bullpen. I guess you hope the starter finishes 7 then.
aff10
I don’t think the idea is to use to a good reliever though. I don’t actually buy it, because I think it’s a real question as to whether warm-up delay is even the cause of that phenomenon and I’m not sure how much buy-in you’d get from players, but Cameron really only proposed it in games where you can use your whole bullpen
darkstar61
I really like the easier solution to the Away Starter issue that Cameron kind of skims over, and hope it is picked up by AL clubs.
If all the teams in the AL started having their starters continue their warmups until his half of the inning began, then we would be able to prove without doubt if there is a disadvantage to having to sit for the top of the 1st on the road.
If it is proven there is such a disadvantage and AL games become more competitive after that minor adjustment, than chalk up one more reason the NL should be implementing a DH rule
Kayrall
For it to be ‘one more reason’ there would have to be at least a first reason.
Also, I don’t see it as being more competitive or a reason to implement the DH. If anything, it makes the game easier (again) for starting pitchers.
darkstar61
Regarding competitiveness; I am guessing you didn’t read the article
Regarding DH; getting to pitch to the equivalent of a highschooler in the 9th spot is probably the single biggest thing in the game making it easier on starting pitchers (for the NL, at least) …that makes your “easier for starters” complaint quite ironic
Priggs89
That’s the first thing I thought of too. Instead of wasting a really good reliever to start the game, why not just keep the starter warming up until he needs to come in? Seems pretty simple if that’s the reason why they’re sucking at starting away games…
darkstar61
Yep, it’s an unbelievably simple solution for the AL on this
NL cant do it because their pitcher needs to prepare to strike out if his turn in the lineup happens to come up, but the AL is the perfect spot to easily even out that disadvantage
Dookie Howser, MD
Did anybody else catch that it wasn’t even use a reliever for the first inning – it was use the reliever for the first batter?
tedturnerproduct
No one else caught that because that’s not what the article says
aff10
For what it’s worth, you are the one who misunderstood. “Thus, Salmon suggests, the starting pitcher could finish his warm-ups during the first batter at-bat, and come straight into the bottom of the first inning without any cool-down period.”
tedturnerproduct
Your are correct, my mistake. I read through the MLBTR synopsis above clearly indicates the “starter” wouldn’t come in until after the top of the first. Dave Cameron’s piece is in fact contrary to that
astros_fan_84
As far as starter a reliever for one inning, there’s another strategy: picking “starters based on the lineup.” If an opposing loads up on lefties or righties thinking they know they the matchup, the manager can flip the script in a way that favors his club.
I don’t think a club could do this for 162, but for 10-15 games, it could be an advantage to win an extra few games.
astros_fan_84
It’s kind of like, I don’t understand why the Red Sox didn’t want Neshak. He kills righties, with so many LHP starters, he’d be great as the first guy in whenever he was available.