A Vastly Overlooked Aspect of Pitch Counts
by Matthew on Apr 18, 2010 2:16 AM PDT
in Miscellaneous
Email
PrintPeople talk about pitch counts a lot. It seems like they have been doing it less over the past year and change than was usual in the past decade but that might just be due to my selective perception. I hope not. I hope people are talking about pitch counts less often because on the whole pitch counts as they have been traditionally calculated (by counting the number of pitches thrown) are dumb.
I could write thousands of words on this subject. I could go over how it relates to starting pitchers. How hitters are stronger now and parks are smaller, leaving pitchers with a smaller margin of error. How that forces them to nibble and gun for strikeouts more which raises not just the number of pitches they need to throw per batter, but the effort level on each pitch as well. I could then transition into talking about how individual pitches are not all thrown in the same way because the leverage of the situation can influence the pitcher into trying to throw faster or bite off more curve, potentially adding stress to their arm.
All of these are valid concerns when we talk about pitch counts and there are plenty more. Last night's 20-inning game between the Mets and the Cardinals highlighted one more that I feel gets left out a lot because discussions on pitch counts tend to focus on starters. Relievers are not to be forgotten either and they have undergone a similar shortening of their usage as starters. One reason why is because they throw so many pitches warming up because they have to enter the game at 100%.
Four Mets pitchers threw at least two innings of relief, allowing Manuel to save closer Francisco Rodriguez for a save situation. That did not occur until the 19th... Rodriguez, who had warmed up every inning from the eighth through the 19th, estimated that he threw more than 100 pitches in the bullpen. And he admitted to being somewhat gassed by the time Manuel finally called his name.
...
Pitch counts are dumb because they are literally dumb. They don't tell us anything.
38 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
But there have been studies done that show
when a pitcher throws over a certain amount (140?), it affects him in the future, right?
I agree though that most relievers are overly limited.
FREE ADAM MOORE
Pitch counts may have a little value but there is so, so much noise that they aren't worth very much, even at the extremes
Generally speaking, you don’t want to let a starter go out and throw 180 pitches. Short of that, there’s not a whole lot we can say.
by Jeff Sullivan on Apr 18, 2010 2:43 AM PDT up reply actions
We seemed to be able to figure out that Jarrod Washburn was done at 90, though.
And by “we,” I mean y’all sexy-type people.
Batted .393/.614/.464 for 2009 Diablos, #5 in OBP for PSSBL Rocky Division.
by Two Rs and Two Ls on Apr 18, 2010 2:57 AM PDT up reply actions
That's just because he wasn't very good to begin with
I think the only safe conclusion you can draw is that pitchers generally get worse the more they throw, which is intuitive of course because they get tired and at some point (depending on the person) they’ll lose velocity as a result. The worse you are as a pitcher fully rested, the less pitches you can throw and still produce acceptable results. So when it was clear Washburn was tiring, you knew he was going to go from mildly acceptable to suck pretty quick.
Incorrect.
There is a whole lot that can be said, but very little that can be accurately modeled. For example: too many pitches can be bad, even very bad, but how much is too much? Figuring that out is where things can get all wonky.
by John Edwards on Apr 18, 2010 3:12 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't see why they aren't important.
An example can be seen from today’s game. The M’s made Verlander pitch 28 (I forget the exact number) pitches in the first inning. Wasn’t the pitch count important at that part of the game?
In a way.
I think it’s everyone’s basic assumption that a starting pitcher is going to throw like 100-110 pitches, maybe up to 120-130 if the guy is a strikeout pitcher in a key late-in-the-season game or something. I think Matthew’s (and Jeff’s) point here is that 100-110 is fairly arbitrary but it’s generally accepted wisdom.
So long as managers are concerned about getting grilled by the press and being compared unfavorably to Dusty Baker for bucking this conventional wisdom, making a starting pitcher throw as many pitches as possible early in the game is pretty important so you can get into the less talented relievers.
Batted .393/.614/.464 for 2009 Diablos, #5 in OBP for PSSBL Rocky Division.
by Two Rs and Two Ls on Apr 18, 2010 3:33 AM PDT up reply actions
No no no no
This isn’t about starters at all. This is about K-Rod warming up like 11 times and throwing ~100 pitches in the bullpen.
I overattributed you. My bad.
But if it wasn’t for your post, Jeff wouldn’t have made the comment.
Batted .393/.614/.464 for 2009 Diablos, #5 in OBP for PSSBL Rocky Division.
by Two Rs and Two Ls on Apr 18, 2010 3:51 AM PDT up reply actions
So...
Correct me if I’m wrong, but is what your saying that the number of pitches thrown in a game is not an accurate measurement of how tired a pitcher is? So looking at K-Rod’s pitch count doesn’t tell us anything about how much he’s actually worked.
It was important because it was (rightly) assumed that Leyland paid attention, and would pull the starter at around 100
In terms of given effectiveness in a situation on a given night, the pitch count doesn’t tell us a damn thing.
Wow, that's a pretty stupid use of a pitcher.
Apparently, when there’s a save situation, that’s an appropriate use of K-Rod, but when the Mets are going into the bottom half of the inning tied and they need to prevent a run to prolong the game, that would be a tremendous waste of K-Rod’s abilities.
Pitcher usage in extra innings can be bizarre sometimes. It seems to me that all the innings are going to be high leverage at that point, so it probably makes sense to go through any relief aces you have available first, and then go to your long-relief guy if the game is still going.
It's also stupid because you should almost never let a starter see the fourth time through the lineup.
Even if a pitcher somehow makes it through the first 27 on 80 pitches, it’s just not worth it except with exceptional, top tier aces.
by lailaihei on Apr 18, 2010 8:24 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Interesting
Do you happen to have some data that shows this?
by Ballard Erik on Apr 18, 2010 10:48 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
A pitcher's mechanics is what is important
I am stating the obvious, but when a pitcher is tired, mechanics can break down. When mechanics break down, it increases the chance of injury. years ago, counting pitches started out as a guide of when to look closer at a pitchers mechanics. It evolved into looking at a strict pitch count to gauge and remove a pitcher. Now, it appears that it is devolving back to just a guide. For those of us who remember that when Nolan Ryan threw a hundred pitches in a game, he was just getting started (and he pitched into his 40’s). So this is a good thing.
Repitition of movement is a factor as well.
Not just breakdown of mechanics.
by Ballard Erik on Apr 18, 2010 10:54 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah I agree
I think loss of good mechanics caused by fatigue is much more dangerous. That said, around 100-110 pitches for most pitchers on an average night is when they are probably starting to get to this point. Also, Nolan Ryan is a freak.
by Edgar for Pres on Apr 18, 2010 6:40 PM PDT up reply actions
I heard Jack McDowell say that pitch counts were utterly rediculous
because of how many a pitcher threw warming up could be any number and they weren’t counted. I tend to agree that in game pitch counts can be relevant but are way, way, way to over analyzed and discussed for how genuinely accurate it truly is.
by Great Sergios Ghost on Apr 18, 2010 9:07 AM PDT reply actions
Crazy how
you and Matthew Carruth from Fangraphs posted about the same thing pretty much at the same time!
I agree that pitch count doesn’t tell you much. It seems like in this day and age, we could have some stat that measures ball movement and speed to calculate how long a pitcher can go.
by DuncHen22 on Apr 18, 2010 10:24 AM PDT reply actions 9 recs
Wow I am so sorry.
I’ll admit it, I’m an idiot. Sorry. I didn’t even look at the author of this blog. I’m new here, give me a break.
I don't think anyone thinks you're an idiot.
It’s a mistake and if you’re not familiar with the site I can see how it would be an easy one to make. Just funny.
by Aaron Campeau on Apr 18, 2010 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions
It's not a common name but it still floored me when I found out it was the same person.
Just caught me flat footed, interacting with authors in real time. I asked straight out, and basically had the same reaction as yours.
I was actually thinking about this while watching Verlander throw to first base
something like 8 times. No it’s not a real pitch, but it has to add some level of fatigue to his arm. Pitch counts sole purpose is to give you an idea how tired the pitcher is, but it doesn’t include this. It doesn’t include warm up pitches (as you mentioned). It doesn’t include pitches between innings, or the kind of pitches the pitcher is throwing. Lots of little things that can easily affect how tired a pitcher really is. Which is why I think they go out and ask the pitcher himself a lot of the time. I think the 100-110 pitch counts are just arbitrary numbers that generally suggest a pitcher should be tired by now. A manager needs to know that sometimes other things deflate or inflate his tiredness over or under the listed pitch count. Like warming up for 8 damn innings is probably going to wear our your reliever before he throws a single pitch.
Now with more lemon bars!
I was thinking the same thing.
I was involved in a game where a LHP hurt his arm throwing a snap throw to first.
by Ballard Erik on Apr 18, 2010 10:50 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I agree
See below
sorry for not reading your response before I posted.
by PagsBrewCrew on Apr 19, 2010 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions
Pitch count situational stats
Have you guys seen this breakdown by Yahoo, maybe others do it aswell
You can look at pitchers hits and runs allowed, etc, depending on what pitch count he is in. This probably cannot be used to compare different pitchers, but for the same pitcher throughout his career or season it might show some patterns unless he undergoes major technique changes or injury, etc. Some may have better stats later in the game because maybe they switch to a different strategy if they start feeling fatigured…
I remember a post within the several weeks that showed fastball pitch speed, and speed decreased each inning. So pitch count can be really important. But it’s a whole different thing trying to figure out how to interpret it for different pitchers.
Lets count pickoff throws too
Sure…it’s not thrown as hard/with the same motion as a real game pitch
how about in game-PC + (warmup throws [including before the inning starts] * 2/3) + (pickoff attempts * 1/2) + (tosses into the catcher/ump to get a new ball * 1/5)
How about the amazingly stupid way that Manuel used K-Rod?
So obsessed with getting him the save that he let’s him throw 100 pitches over 8 innings in the pen.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Lookout Landing
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
