Brandon Morrow From Pitch F/X
It's early. It's really early. Then again, there's not much else to talk about so let's talk about Brandon Morrow's incredible improvement so far in 2008. Subjectively we've seen a much more effective breaking pitch so far this season along with, especially recently, improved velocity. But we here at Lookout Landing LLC. do not care much for subjectivity. We like warm nurturing numbers to surround us in their soothing glow so let us get some of them.
First off, that improved velocity. Is it real? Yes. In 2007, 61 of Morrow's 1,185 pitches exceeded 98 miles per hour according to pF/X. So far in 2008, 27 of 282 have done the same, an increase of 86%. Morrow's average fastball velocity has also risen a tick to 96.1 mph, up from 95.9 last year. Staying with the fastball, let's take a look at his location first; 2007 is on the left, 2008 on the right.


Each octagon represents a pitch location. The "brighter" the pixel, the more pitches crossed that spot. The order goes: purple, blue, green, yellow, orange, red.
It's a bit hard to compare because we are dealing with such disparate sample sizes to date, but the plot on the right is more compact radially than the one on the left. The other good you can somewhat squeeze out of this comparison is the better grouping toward the corners of the strike zones in 2008. Notably compare the upper left corner between the two years. To get a clearer picture of what's been done with Morrow's fastball, here is a results table at which to gander:
| Fastballs | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Ball | CalledStr | SwingStr | Fouled | Batted |
| 2007 | 38.9% | 15.9% | 12.7% | 20.4% | 12.1% |
| 2008 | 31.2% | 14.1% | 15.1% | 29.8% | 9.8% |
In 2007, batters watched 54.8% of Morrow's fastballs go by of which 71% were called a ball. Thus far in 2008, batters are only taking 45.3% of fastballs and those taken are called a ball 69% of the time. It's a 9.5% drop in taken fastballs which is pretty significant.
Moving on to non fastballs, lets again start with location first. Ignore those really wide plots on the far left and right, those were intentional balls that got caught in the algorithm.


What jumps out to me is that in 2007 the majority of Morrow's offspeed pitches were elevated in the zone. That's generally not a good place to throw such offerings unless they're of good quality and have sufficient deception or movement to fool the batter. Remember, a changeup is only effective because you trick the batter into thinking it's a fastball. Otherwise, it's just a really sucky batting practice fastball.
This year to date the overall positioning of Morrow's offspeed offerings is much lower with very few at all reaching above or beyond the upper third of the strike zone. Is it a coincidence then that among the much improved control Morrow has also seen a splurge in groundballs in 2008? In 2007, just 32.4% of batted balls were classified as grounders by MLB. That's not good for a starting pitcher, but for a reliever with strikeout stuff that's pretty typical. You usually have to pitch up in the zone to get strikeouts on fastballs because most of your swinging strikes will come on high heat that batters cannot catch up to. The side effect of that is more flyballs (and more popups).
But so far in 2008, Morrow has seen a groundball percentage of 48.6%, a healthy number even for a starting pitcher. For reference, bad 2008 version Felix only has a groundball rate of 47.1%. Lets turn again to a result table.
| Not Fastballs | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Ball | CalledStr | SwingStr | Fouled | Batted |
| 2007 | 42.9% | 14.7% | 7.1% | 15.2% | 20.1% |
| 2008 | 36.8% | 23.7% | 9.2% | 10.5% | 19.7% |
Keep in mind we're dealing with even more of a small sample here for 2008, but an early trend is pretty clear, batters are only taking 3% more often on offspeed pitches, but in 2008, 39.2% of those are being called a strike compared to just 25.5% last year. The uptick in swinging strikes is helpful too because one concern is that once batters notice the trend of improved control, they might start swinging more often at the offspeed pitches, and if they are hittable pitches then Morrow could be back in trouble but this time from line drives rather than from walks. That's why watching the amount of missed bats on non fastballs will be one of several key indicators on Morrow's growth.
Brandon Morrow has improved in nearly every respect in 2008. His walks are down, his strikeouts are up (and both are backed by solid core numbers) and his groundballs are up. He's easily one of the five best pitchers in the organization at the moment. He was drafted as a starter. It's beyond time to give him a shot at starting. Hopefully this organization will soon realize that 2008 is a lost cause in terms of a playoff appearance. But it can be salvaged in part by taking steps forward for the future. Testing Brandon Morrow in the rotation is such a step.
39 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Darker color....more pitches in that location
I fucking hate you Mariners
Or I guess...more yellows to reds than blues and purples.
I fucking hate you Mariners
Yeah, it followed the same pattern as my Where Felix Pitches article
forgot that was awhile ago, I’ll add a note to clarify.
If his 'exceptional' FB percentage is way up
and his average FB velocity is quite close, is he throwing some other type of FB or cutter?
Also, have you detected any distinction in outcomes from his slider or change? From Kalk’s player cards, it looks like his change is a bit different in terms of movement, but I think we all really want to know what’s happening if/when people put it in play.
Finally, when/where do you think this command developed? Could just be age or getting more accustomed to playing at this level, but the difference appears so striking, it’s natural to want to pinpoint something that changed. I really don’t know, but Morrow and Jimenez came back from Venezuela different pitchers. Even Hyphen is noticeably different, from using his curve less frequently to getting more movement on his change.
argh, ate my comment
1. I don’t think so because the spread between average FB (96) and exceptional FB (98+) isn’t large enough so that the higher uptick in faster FBs would draw the average up more than we see. That’s my theory anyways.
2. I didn’t look at it for this because I don’t have pitch classification (yet) for 2007 and I wanted to focus on year over year improvement here. I’m sure that will be looked at later on when we have more offspeed pitches to deal with.
3. Like you I could only speculate. It may even just be a hot streak and nothing’s actually changed.
I can think of three assclowns under contract who are blocking his path.
One is a liar, one is greasy, the other one likes 8 year olds. Probably.
Matthew,
Nice reference to the “surprise face” on THT.
I reject your reality and substitute my own!
Also, I'm always down for some online Grand Theft Auto IV or Rock Band. Gamertag: Phildopip
by Phil Hatzenbuehler on Jun 2, 2008 12:59 PM PDT reply actions
I particularly like the fastballs moving away from the inner half
It’s an awful lot tougher to get your bat around on an outside fastball than an inside fastball.
It is tougher, but then again
the value of velocity drops quickly as you move from the inside edge to the outside edge of the plate.
Oh shit you're right, I forgot about that article
I just have that Pedroia strikeout running over and over in my head.
by Jeff Sullivan on Jun 2, 2008 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions
God that was beautiful.
That was a perfect pitch.
Why is FanGraphs' velocity for Morrow's FB so different from pf/x?
Fangraphs has him at 94.8 last year and 96.1 this year for an average fastball, which would be a much more significant gain than the .2 mph you have listed in the main.
Also, it interested me that his change % is about half what it was last year, while his slider and split use are up by about 50% each. Of course, this is tiny sample, but it looks like he’s at least experimenting with four pitches, and has 3.3% unknown as well (although I’d bet those are mostly changeups)
Fangraphs data
Comes from Baseball Info Solutions, not the Sportsvision camera setup for Pitch F/x. Different data inputs provide slightly different results.
Seems like this is a fairly significant difference at least in the 2007 data, though
1.1 mph per pitch over a sample size of roughly 820 pitches. Also, this season, the 96.1s match up, even though the sample size is much smaller.
Was there some sort of change in the setup of the systems in the offseason?
There's also a possible case
of fangraphs counting intentional balls (of which Morrow threw 12) as fastballs. Yeah it’s only 12 pitches, but they’re significantly lower velocity. I don’t know if that’s the case or not, just speculating.
Hmmm, with 12 intentional balls
I could only get his avg velocity down to 95.4, assuming an intentional ball was thrown @60 mph and using your 95.9 for the remainder of his fastballs
Pitch F/x data from last year is kinda spotty
They were tinkering with a bunch of stuff last year, including where they aimed the cameras. Halfway through the year, they switched the spot they focused them at, which changed a bunch of stuff.
I’m not saying it is a pitch f/x problem, as the fangraphs data has some issues too. Just throwing out a possible explanation.
Interesting
that seems like a pretty logical explanation, and if you combine that with the 3 IBBs he issued last year, 1.1 mph doesn’t seem like an implausible difference
Thank you, Matthew.
This is the kind of information that needs to make its way to the pitchers and coaching staff. All of it is quantifiable and is the most telling of what is wrong/right with a pitcher.
We know Brian Bannister looks at these numbers and charts. He probably pitches better than he would without this information. Guys with talent like Morrow, Felix, and Bedard, would be able to improve that much more to assure their dominance.
Not necessarily
Bannister pointed out in that MLBTR interview that he doesn’t believe his approach is for everyone – that he has to think like that to make up for not having world-class stuff. He pointed out that some guys think their way into the big leagues (like a Scott Hatteberg or Brian Bannister) and other guys think their way out of it (like say Billy Beane).
I think where this information serves its greatest potential use is among the coaching staffs – with certain players who might not benefit from such data if they studied themselves, the coaches could use this to gently encourage them to, say, throw more breaking balls early in the game, etc.

by 










