Farquhar working with Giolito (analytically and stuff)

[Heads22]

A fantastic article by Fegan on how Danny has been working with Lucas on utilizing the high fastball and how Danny is a numbers nerd

 

https://theathletic.com/246514/2018/02/20/d...-lucas-giolito/

 

 

[bmags]

Yeah posted this in the fangraphs thread. Maybe my favorite Sox article on pitching ever.

[bmags]

Just makes me love baseball. So many ways to succeed, especially in pitching. Farquhar telling Gio to drop 2 seamer, teams like pirates relied on it exclusively at one point.

[caulfield12]

Don’t we want to keep the ball down at USCF?

 

Second, how effective is a four seam FB at 89-93 mph, especially up in the zone?

[Heads22]

Well, that's sort of what the article discusses

[caulfield12]

Can’t get the website to download in China today...

[chitownsportsfan]

Just go get a sub guys, this is such an awesome article and things like "carry" I had not previously been introduced to despite a pretty keen interest in baseball and sabermetrics:

 

“The fastball has a thing called carry,” Farquhar said. “My fastball has an average of 10 or 11 inches of carry — and this is what the Rays told me — the average big league fastball is nine inches of carry, so it’s a couple inches above that. Then you have the kill zone which is the one that gets murdered most of the time by the hitters, and that’s eight inches of carry. That’s the one where you don’t want to be no matter what the pitch is. That’s not to say that every pitch with that carry level is going to be hit over the fence, but a majority of them get hit for extra-base hits. And then you have the changeup, I think mine sits between three and four, so it comes out the same but there’s separation in the pitch.”

 

Being above or below the kill zone, where sinkers and offspeed pitches drop at a quicker rate than expected, is thus where effectiveness lies. Lucas Giolito's four-seam fastball averaged around 10 inches of carry in his brief time in the majors last season, which by the Rays' model, made it destined for success once he decided to elevate it, even though it only sat at 92 mph.

 

“Marco Estrada has like, the best carry in all of baseball,” Farquhar said. “When he’s throwing his 90 mph fastball at the belt and blowing it by guys and nobody knows why, it’s because he’s got 13, 14 inches of carry, which is significantly more than most guys in baseball. Then he’s got the changeup that plays off it. It’s on the same plane. I have seen him a few times pitch when his changeup starts going sideways, which looks cool on the TV when his pitch is moving side to side. When his changeup starts getting sideways he gets hit hard. When his changeup stays straight and true, they can’t distinguish that it’s a changeup and hitters have no idea.”

 

https://theathletic.com/246514?shared_by=33019

[caulfield12]

Okay, that makes more sense.

 

The question, then, is what carry he would have at 94-98 and whether he’s better off at 90-93?

Edited February 21, 2018 by caulfield12

[chitownsportsfan]

Okay, that makes more sense.

 

The question, then, is what carry he would have at 94-98 and whether he’s better off at 90-93?

 

I can't post any more of the article but the argument (if you will) of the article was that there's more to successful pitching than just velocity and horizontal movement and it's something of course we always "guessed" (intuitively) but couldn't quite finger.

 

Farquhar talks about how when he was in Seattle (before he looked into the analytics of it), then manager Lloyd McClendon pointed out how he was having success up in the zone even at 90-92 because his ball "stayed up" -- independent of the new data on spin, velocity etc via pitchfx (good looking out Lloyd!) . His fastball doesn't rise but in appears to because most pitchers' (regardless of velocity) falls more relatively. Gio's is apparently similar.

 

So the question you asked, to finally get to it is -- it depends. Usually it's probably still better to throw harder. But if a guy can't, he can use this new data to target hitters in new ways. It could be something Gio uses in the future.

Edited February 21, 2018 by chitownsportsfan

[caulfield12]

I can't post any more of the article but the argument (if you will) of the article was that there's more to successful pitching than just velocity and horizontal movement and it's something of course we always "guessed" (intuitively) but couldn't quite finger.

 

Farquhar talks about how when he was in Seattle (before he looked into the analytics of it), then manager Lloyd McClendon pointed out how he was having success up in the zone even at 90-92 because his ball "stayed up" -- independent of the new data on spin, velocity etc via pitchfx (good looking out Lloyd!) . His fastball doesn't rise but in appears to because most pitchers' (regardless of velocity) falls more relatively. Gio's is apparently similar.

 

So the question you asked, to finally get to it is -- it depends. Usually it's probably still better to throw harder. But if a guy can't, he can use this new data to target hitters in new ways. It could be something Gio uses in the future.

 

Seems generally like up and down movement, good (as long as hitter can’t differentiate a change and FB in delivery)...side to side, bad...and then you have the 45 degree break like a Rivera cutter or Sale slider.

 

For example, Contreras “rising” fastball at 95-97 and forkball at 88-90. Plus, opposite directions in movement. Or two seam sinking fastball, like Garland.

Edited February 21, 2018 by caulfield12

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Don’t we want to keep the ball down at USCF?

 

Second, how effective is a four seam FB at 89-93 mph, especially up in the zone?

 

Ask Jose Quintana.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

I can't post any more of the article but the argument (if you will) of the article was that there's more to successful pitching than just velocity and horizontal movement and it's something of course we always "guessed" (intuitively) but couldn't quite finger.

 

Farquhar talks about how when he was in Seattle (before he looked into the analytics of it), then manager Lloyd McClendon pointed out how he was having success up in the zone even at 90-92 because his ball "stayed up" -- independent of the new data on spin, velocity etc via pitchfx (good looking out Lloyd!) . His fastball doesn't rise but in appears to because most pitchers' (regardless of velocity) falls more relatively. Gio's is apparently similar.

 

So the question you asked, to finally get to it is -- it depends. Usually it's probably still better to throw harder. But if a guy can't, he can use this new data to target hitters in new ways. It could be something Gio uses in the future.

 

How is "carry" measured? He said things like "8 carry gets crushed", but does that mean 8 inches? And 8 inches from what point? And does any public website track this?

[chitownsportsfan]

How is "carry" measured? He said things like "8 carry gets crushed", but does that mean 8 inches? And 8 inches from what point? And does any public website track this?

 

It's pitchfx but I don't think it's available to the public. I'm guessing it's the amount of drop in inches (or in this case the amount it doesn't drop) between the exact 3d position the pitcher releases the ball and where it ends up over the "heart" of the plate -- also mapped 3d.

 

Anybody know for sure?

Edited February 21, 2018 by chitownsportsfan

[bighurt4life]

It's pitchfx but I don't think it's available to the public. I'm guessing it's the amount of drop in inches (or in this case the amount it doesn't drop) between the exact 3d position the pitcher releases the ball and where it ends up over the "heart" of the plate -- also mapped 3d.

 

Anybody know for sure?

Probably a pretty good guess, or something along those same lines. I’d guess it’s proprietary information that and reach team may use a slightly different model. Regardless it’s a cool way of looking at what type of fastball a pitcher throws and how a guy can have success even though he doesn’t throw it 100

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

It's pitchfx but I don't think it's available to the public. I'm guessing it's the amount of drop in inches (or in this case the amount it doesn't drop) between the exact 3d position the pitcher releases the ball and where it ends up over the "heart" of the plate -- also mapped 3d.

 

Anybody know for sure?

 

This is the part that confused me, because if you want to get a high fastball by somehow, you presumably want it to appear to rise, not drop. So the idea of 13 being amazing and 8 being bad didn't make sense to me. I wonder if maybe that number is measured from the exact 3D center of the strikezone? So 8 inches from the heart of the zone versus 13 inches? But then it's more of location of the pitch, not movement of it.

 

I need some sort of graphical representation to learn this apparently.

[southsider2k5]

This is the part that confused me, because if you want to get a high fastball by somehow, you presumably want it to appear to rise, not drop. So the idea of 13 being amazing and 8 being bad didn't make sense to me. I wonder if maybe that number is measured from the exact 3D center of the strikezone? So 8 inches from the heart of the zone versus 13 inches? But then it's more of location of the pitch, not movement of it.

 

I need some sort of graphical representation to learn this apparently.

 

Talking in terms of physics, making a pitch rise is impossible. Really what is happening is that the pitch isn't falling, or isn't falling as much as the batters eyes tell it that it should be falling. There is a parabola that a batter expects. My guess is that a pitcher who has a hang time of 8 is what is "normal". A pitcher who has a hang time of 13 isn't seeing the same drop rate so batters are under their ball.

[Jake]

I suspect this may be the amount of distance before the pitch begins to drop, relative to the hypothetical non-spinning ball used for other PitchFX metrics. If I'm right, then 10 inches of carry would mean it doesn't begin it's gravity-induced drop until about 10 inches later than a non-spinning ball thrown in a vacuum would. It may also mean simply that it would literally travel 10 inches further (if not caught by the catcher first) than that hypothetical non-spinning ball. In that case you'd interpret carry the same way you would when you talk about an outfielder whose throws carry.

[bmags]

I suspect this may be the amount of distance before the pitch begins to drop, relative to the hypothetical non-spinning ball used for other PitchFX metrics. If I'm right, then 10 inches of carry would mean it doesn't begin it's gravity-induced drop until about 10 inches later than a non-spinning ball thrown in a vacuum would. It may also mean simply that it would literally travel 10 inches further (if not caught by the catcher first) than that hypothetical non-spinning ball. In that case you'd interpret carry the same way you would when you talk about an outfielder whose throws carry.

 

Right, because longer is better, there has to be some default that indicates when the ball should begin to drop. I thought maybe it was maybe where the ball is when the hitter can first identify position, but I think you are right.

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Farquhar sounds like a future pitching coach.

[bmags]

An important part of this is Farquhar was coming from the Rays who believe the high low as gospel, where side to side isn't as effective.

 

At the end it gets into how this isn't so obviously a "hack" to pitching. Sale, after all, used a 2 seamer to establish both sides of plate, where is slider could go one way and two seamer another. Giolito wanted same 4 quadrant coverage.

 

It's one reason I'm so excited for Duncan. Cooper will keep them fundamentally sound and accurate, Duncan can create great game plans like this.

[ChiliIrishHammock24]

Talking in terms of physics, making a pitch rise is impossible.

 

Right....that's why I said "you presumably want it to appear to rise"