Neither Here Nor There

by Jeff Sullivan on Jul 24, 2009 11:15 AM PDT in Seattle Mariners Stats

Results of Washburn's 'Flipper' pitch on the year, assuming I have isolated it properly in the PITCHfx numbers (of which I am confident):

	Count	Percent
Total Thrown	106	5.6%
Strikes	56	52.8%
Swings	23	21.7%
StS	9	8.5%
StF	4	3.8%
StI	10	9.4%
StC	33	31.1%

Washburn hasn't thrown a whole lot of them for strikes, but that's to be expected for three reasons:

(1) It's not a pitch with which he has much experience

(2) Curveballs tend to be thrown for balls more often than other pitches

(3) Batters haven't swung at it

It's that last point that's the key. On average, about 60% of curveballs are taken, and about 11% of curveballs go for called strikes. With the Flipper, though, 78% have been taken, and 31% have gone for called strikes. Pitchers talk all the time about how something they throw is intended to mess with the hitters' timing, but Washburn's actually done it. With acknowledgement of the sample size, a called strike rate of 31% is extraordinary.

Jarrod Washburn isn't very good. He's just not, and too many people continue to let themselves get tricked by ERA. However, just because he's nothing special doesn't mean he hasn't improved, and one of the reasons he's been able to get better has been his embracing of the slow curve. Make no mistake. It's no Mr. Snappy, and its name is kind of stupid, but Jarrod's Flipper does appear to be a weapon.

Tweet Comment 71 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Jeebus

His overall StC% is 15.3. He has thrown the Flipper for a called strike more than twice as much as any other pitch.

Jeff, how much of this do you think is due to the novelty of it? i.e., hitters haven’t seen it from Wash and so they take it to be careful, like with Livian Hernandez’s eephus pitch or whatever the hell he calls it.

A plague on the Angels' families

by calim on Jul 24, 2009 11:22 AM PDT reply actions

Hard to say, but I think that's definitely a concern

We’ll just have to monitor how it does going forward.

by Jeff Sullivan on Jul 24, 2009 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions

I wonder how much that regression could be balanced out by his increased experience with it.

It may well turn out to be a wash.

Get it? A wash? Get it? Like Wash-burn!

by Lanky on Jul 24, 2009 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions

New post up above this one!

by Jeff Sullivan on Jul 24, 2009 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Man I hope they are listening to offers for this guy.

by Mariner Melee on Jul 24, 2009 11:25 AM PDT reply actions

Baker thinks we should keep him and offer him an extension.

pukes

I will smash your face into a jelly.

by Phil Hatzenbuehler on Jul 24, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions

3 years, 3 million. Take it or leave it.

by abender20 on Jul 24, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions

Seems like if we can get him next year for 5-8 million,

it would be a good value for us. And since he seems to interested in staying here, he just might sign for something like that. He’s been worth 2.5 wins so far this year, and even with regression, he should be worth 2 wins next year I’d think.

Fuck the Angels!

by JMKaustin on Jul 24, 2009 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm not opposed to that entirely.

However, while he should have no problem justifying a 5-8 mill contract from a WAR perspective, if you can get similar production from Vargas and his really cheap contract, that money could be spent on something else.

by abender20 on Jul 24, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions

Agreed.

If Jack Z. feels that we already have enough depth at sp, there’s no reason to pay for more.

Fuck the Angels!

by JMKaustin on Jul 24, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions

"should be worth 2 wins next year I’d think."

For what it’s worth,

Washburn’s WAR 2006-8: 1.9, 1.8, 1.3

He has pitched legit better than last year, but he is also bearing down on 35.

by Matthew on Jul 24, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah, I am very uncomfortable with the assumptions people make about this year

being repeatable. Like sb has said a few times, 1 year deal at $4M or trade his ass now.

by Sec 108 on Jul 24, 2009 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah, $4 mil is much less risky.

Fuck the Angels!

by JMKaustin on Jul 24, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions

That's a valid point also.

I’m not coming from a perspective that extending Wash is the right thing to do. But I think with an excellent defence behind him, he could provide value as a starter next year. Also, I’m 100% behind trading him if we can get some value from him that way.

Fuck the Angels!

by JMKaustin on Jul 24, 2009 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions

Well of course he does

by Jeff Sullivan on Jul 24, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions

Actually that was a reasonable article

by Jeff Sullivan on Jul 24, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions

It WAS a reasonable article

it confuses me a little bit how he reaches the conclusion he does though.

FUCK THE ANGELS!

by Fuckmikereilly on Jul 24, 2009 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions

Ehhh

There’s a reasonable argument to be made that he’s worth re-signing, as long as he doesn’t want too much money.

by Jeff Sullivan on Jul 24, 2009 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions

And I agree with that argument

But the fact that Wash will want more money than is reasonable, and Baker still says resign him, is what confuses me.

FUCK THE ANGELS!

by Fuckmikereilly on Jul 24, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions

I might have missed it

Where does Baker say Wash will want more money than what’s reasonable?

A plague on the Angels' families

by calim on Jul 24, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions

He didn't.

by abender20 on Jul 24, 2009 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions

I'm actually not convinced that Washburn will want a lot of money

He thought about retiring just a few months ago, he likes it here, and he’s honest about what he can do. But, who knows. Boras.

by Jeff Sullivan on Jul 24, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions

He'd be insane not to cash in on a sub 4 ERA

by Poochie on Jul 24, 2009 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions

My thoughts exactly. If he hits the open market there is no way he returns.

So why would he sign early?

by Sec 108 on Jul 24, 2009 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions

True, but he said he'd like to extend his contract here now,

due to feeling comfortable in Seattle. Don’t know if that’s just talk or if he means it.

Fuck the Angels!

by JMKaustin on Jul 24, 2009 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions

I guess if he really does want money, then I'd be very content resigning him

As long as we have money for Beltre!

FUCK THE ANGELS!

by Fuckmikereilly on Jul 24, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions

Memo to Boras:

Package deal, Adrian and Jarrod.

Ades for 4 years, 50 mil
Wash for 2 years, 8 mil

Go Nova

by dbroncos31 on Jul 24, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions

Or more for Beltre

Go Nova

by dbroncos31 on Jul 24, 2009 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions

As much as I love Adrian 4 for 50 is too much risk.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 24, 2009 1:01 PM PDT up reply actions

34 year old Beltre likely won't be as good

by Mariner John on Jul 24, 2009 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions

As others have said before, most of his value is tied up in his defense and defense is the first skill to decline.

by Aaron Campeau on Jul 24, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions

Yes, exactly.

Plus his offense in Safeco would likely be worse at that point, barring strange aging pattern.

by Mariner John on Jul 24, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Whatever. His agent works for him, mo-fo!

by Lanky on Jul 24, 2009 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions

Tell that to Trevor Ariza

Go Nova

by dbroncos31 on Jul 24, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions

First of all, to clarify, I was paraphrasing Washburn.

Second of all, who the hell is Trevor Ariza?

by Lanky on Jul 24, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions

He plays in a league that goes by the name "NBA"

I believe it stands for Not Basketball, Actually.

I never really liked the old tagline.

CougCenter

by Craig Powers on Jul 24, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions

A man whose agent killed his career.

Ariza was a key part of the Lakers last year, and was a free agent this summer. He wanted to come back to LA, where he was a fan favorite and a good role player.

But his agent was a dick and strung along LA, demanding 8-9 million. LA was willing to offer about 6 mil, which his agent said wouldn’t be enough.

So the Lakers called his bluff and signed a similar player for 6 million, and Ariza ended up signing with Houston (who is going to be TERRIBLE this year) for the same amount of money ($6 mil).

So now instead of being on a championship caliber team as a fan favorite (who would likely be a 4th or 5th option), he’s on an awful team as one of their top options. So basically he will likely struggle this year on a 25-57 team that has no real love for him.

All because his agent tried to play hardball. Ariza admitted that he was upset about what happened because he was willing to take 6 mil to stay in LA.

Ridiculously long story short, agents sometimes fuck shit up for their clients.

Go Nova

by dbroncos31 on Jul 24, 2009 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Thanks for the backstory.

My answer is this: Trevor Ariza is no Jarrod Washburn.

by Lanky on Jul 24, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions

But on the other hand two whiter first names you'll never see

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Jul 24, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions

Agreed

Go Nova

by dbroncos31 on Jul 24, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Agents work for their clients though

if Ariza didn’t want his agent to do that he should have taken more control of the process. If the client says “stop” the agent stops.

Nice Guys Finish Third - My semantics are a waste of time.

by pdb on Jul 24, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah but many athletes

seem to assume that the agent is doing the right thing for them.

I agree with you 100% that Trevor should have stepped in, but from what I’ve heard about the situation, he just let his agent do what his agent thought was best. And it cost him.

I do not think this will be an issue with Jarrod, although I wonder what would happen if we offered 2 for 10 and some NL team offered 3 for 25 or something like that.

Go Nova

by dbroncos31 on Jul 24, 2009 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions

Great summary

Might be worth mentioning the guy that LA signed instead is Ron “crazy pills” Artest, formerly of the Houston Rockets, master of the “dribble for 12 seconds, then throw up a prayer” offense. Ron ron isn’t going to set the world on fire, but most people agree he’s a better player than Ariza. Ron’s value goes way up if someone else is shooting the ball.

Ariza probably listened too much to what his agent told him was out there.

Fuck the Angels. If you see this, add a fuck to your signature. This is a fucking experiment.

by PDXTai on Jul 24, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions