Cahill's Curveball Conversion, Part 2
by danmerqury on Jun 29, 2010 7:00 AM PDT
Email
Print
Two months ago, I talked about Trevor Cahill and that he had increased the amount of sink he was able to generate, particularly on his new curveball. But back then, I only had one 2010 start to work with, and his new and improved pitches didn't exactly translate into good results (5IP, 7H, 6ER, 1BB, 3K).
Man, oh man, have things changed. Since that first start on April 30, he's compiled a 2.31 ERA in 11 starts, which was capped with Saturday's astounding ten strikeout performance. So what's changed, and how did he do it? I don't think I have a definitive answer, but I have an idea. First, I'll run through the results of this outstanding turnaround, then, I'll float a possible explanation.
All of his peripherals have increased. He's striking out more, he's walking less (his BB/9 is actually the lowest it's ever been for him throughout his entire professional career, even including rookie ball), and most importantly, he's inducing more grounders than ever before. His line drive percentage is one of the best in the majors. And to top it all off, he's trimmed his home run problem substantially, by giving up less fly balls and giving up less home runs on the fly balls he does allow. If this is the Cahill that prospect reports dreamt of, consider me impressed.
Now, my explanation? It's his pitch choices. Last year, he essentially threw an equal amount of fastballs, sinkers, and changeups, which added up to 90% of his arsenal. How can a pitcher fresh out of AA hope to reliably get major league hitters out without a breaking ball? This year, he's thrown a vastly different arrangement of pitches. Incredibly, he's thrown his sinker more, almost 50% of the time, with the other half equally distributed between his fastball, changeup, and new curveball. And last Saturday? Almost 70% sinkers and 20% curveballs, with a mere handful of fastballs and changeups.
From a guy who stopped throwing his curveball halfway through 2009, this new confidence is great to see. In a few months, he's achieved such a sense of comfort with his new curveball that he's been able to throw it for strikes and improve his control to a level he's never had in his entire career. That's simply incredible.
The A's are in Baltimore for the next few days as they kick off a three-game set. Dallas Braden will try yet again to get a win after his perfect game as he opposes Brian Matusz at 4:05 PM.
83 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Interesting observation Dan...
this mimics what fangraphs was saying as well. However, is there anyway you can overlay the same sinker/fastballs/changeups he was throwing last year to this year? I’d like to see if any of those pitches have changed as well. If they haven’t even more support to mainly being his repertoire of his pitches as the deciding factor this year.
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden
His pitches have changed.
I talked about it last time.
http://www.athleticsnation.com/2010/5/4/1457183/whats-gotten-into-trevor-cahill
Basically, increased sink on everything, and a huge new curveball.
She lives by the wall, and waits by the door.
She walks in the sun, to me.
Here's the year over year comparison of the movement on his curveball
2009: 0.9 inches horizontal, -2.2 inches vertical
2010: 5.2 inches horizontal, -6.2 inches vertical
Huge is right. Plus he’s getting two inches more sink on his two seamer.
http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfx.aspx?playerid=6249&position=P
Man, I wish I had two more inches to sink.
Regardless, this is great news for the team.
by LoneStranger on Jun 29, 2010 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Thanks NRC!
Did you take a look at his 2 seam FB velocity range vs. last year! Wow!
http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfxo.aspx?playerid=6249&position=P&pitch=FT
Talk about learning how to keep hitters off balance! He’s also learning how to throw the changeup/curveball much more consistently.
edit: hmm I also noted that he is developing much more consistency in his mechanics as well. if you compare his horrific Toronto game vs. the Pittsburg gem in terms of release points:
Toronto
Pitt
It’s much more mechanically sound. This might also be another thing that the A’s have had him working on….
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
"Just play for the name in front of the uniform.." - Dallas Braden
by ST on Jun 29, 2010 7:11 PM PDT up reply actions
It's also possible that his performance last year was hurt by the back/left shoulder stiffness he had (and evidently didn't tell anyone about)
It may be that what we see as progress is also a matter of him getting back on the track he’d been on before being derailed a little in his first major-league season by a nagging injury.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
and the fact that he should have split the year between AA and AAA.
This is the biggest lesson learned with Cahill and Barton: if a prospect is rushed, their performance at the big league level is nearly meaningless. Is Cahill at all the same pitcher he was last year? Not even close. So, why bother analyzing his performance if he’s going to go add more pitches and improve the ones he has drastically? He isnt the same pitcher he was, he’s exponentially better, so why bother looking at his peripherals to say “he’s going to be terrible in 2010”? They dont mean anything because he’s just going to adjust his game so much that he becomes a totally different player.
We so badly want to point out how bad peripheral stats are, and how its difficult to improve them. Its why Joe Saunders sucks (except against us) and we all know it. But what happens to players who are rushed or mostly injured. I have a real belief that Cliff Pennington is next in line after Barton & Cahill to really start improving his game by leaps and bounds. He was a top 100 prospect and rising until he got injured. His injuries hindered and obscured his game so much that no one really knows what kind of player he is. You simply cannot show any definitive, healthy evidence why he will or wont be an 800 OPS SS with good defense, because there isnt any. His minor league games, like Taylors this year, have been skewed by injury. Sometimes this happens and too often do analyzers want to take them at face value, when they shouldnt. Its a rare time, but it has happened twice (and potentially 3 times) now that we need to take a collective breath on some prospects and realize that they were not allowed to give and show all that they have in the farm.
-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.
Pennington has a much, much longer track record
both in the minors and in college (Cahill was drafted out of high school) than Cahill does, and he never dominated in the minors the way Cahill did. He’s also significantly older. As to whether Cliff can be an 800 OPS SS…look, the guy has played 5 seasons in the minors, covering nearly 500 games, and he nosed above an 800 OPS only once: 64 games in Sacto as a 24-year-old at the end of 2008, with an OPS of .812. Followed by 99 games at Sacto the next year with an OPS of .712. His career, minor-league OPS, covering all levels of the minors, is 720.
So yes, I can’t prove he won’t hit much, much better in the majors than he ever did in nearly 500 minor league games, but I think the likelihood that he will do that, at the age of 26, is incredibly low. And if it’s all been “skewed by injury”, then I’d have to ask why a guy who’s been injured, evidently, for 5 consecutive years is suddenly going to be healthy.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
This touches on one of my theories about how "hot" and "cold" do exist,
but are often correlated with “full health” and “compromised health” that we may not ever even know about.
For example guys who suddenly go 23-50 with a lot of hard hit balls might not be getting “lucky” so much as they are going through a stretch of unusual good overall health. And verse-vica.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I think the general beef with "hot" and "cold"
is more the predictability of it than the fact that it does exist. Especially as nobody really knows (players themselves included) what all the contributing factors are.
It's an interesting thought,
and something very hard to delve into, the idea that perhaps variations in a player’s production levels are not based on mere chance, but rather on small often invisible inconsistencies in their lives, be it injury or even just feeling mentally good after some sort of good event (a birth of a child, a marriage, a good meal, etc…) which cause them to produce at a higher level—a level that is, due to the vicissitudes in human emotion and health, unsustainable.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it is true
However, when better performance actually only increases your chances of success from say 25% to 35% it is hard to notice it in results (the only easily measurable aspect of performance) over a limited period of time.
Right, but the thing is (and this is where statistics moves into a much more philosophical realm),
when you have a 25% chance of an event occuring, what factors go into producing the result? If you roll a die, and we assume the die is absolutely fair, there should be a 1/6 chance of rolling any of the numbers… but when you do roll a 3, the factors that led to the result include the height of the toss, the initial speed, the traction on the surface it hits, etc. And despite the fact that we DO control many of those factors, it’s still a 1 in 6 chance.
But apply this to baseball:
If a player has a .333 projected on base percentage, they have a 1 in 3 chance of getting on base. So we assume that in the next three at bats, they will fail to get on base in 2 of them and will succeed in another one. But this is not because if they swing exactly the same way on exactly the same pitch and hit it in exactly the same spot 3 times that it will be caught twice. In fact, it is the fact that these at bats will be decisively different, that every swing and every pitch has an infinite number of variables which eventually equal something like a 1 in 3 chance of success. But this all-encompassing statistic is an amalgamation of a player’s extended performance, not really an assessment of each individual situation—that would be (at least in this millennium) humanly impossible to calculate. BUT, there still is a reasonable argument to be made that, although even over an extended period of time (or even a fairly short period of time) it’s virtually impossible to get on base more than 50% of the time, the instantaneous event of success is caused by thousands of variables, many of which are controllable.
So, if anybody followed that long winded response, my point is this:
When a player gets on base at a .350 clip, it does not mean that in each individual plate appearance they have a 35% chance of getting on base (although this is the most accurate prediction we can make). What it means is that, no matter how skilled a player may be throughout a period of time, 35% is a SUSTAINABLE level of production, a measure of their ability to mantain the moments when they are feeling best, when they are “seeing the ball well” and all those other cliches and to prevent the moments when they’re feeling bad as much as possible.
N.B. This does not totally exclude the idea of luck. When a player hits a line drive, for instance, there’s still the chance of it being caught, and as far as I can tell this is not a controllable event (for the hitter). Many “hot” and “cold” streaks ARE indeed caused by luck, and all are helped or hindered by it. My point is more that the factors which go into any result are ALWAYS different, and an on-base percentage is simply the long-term control of all these totally diverse situations, not simply a percentage prediction for each event.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Regarding luck:
When a player hits a line drive, for instance, there’s still the chance of it being caught, and as far as I can tell this is not a controllable event (for the hitter).
Not 100% controllable, but a skilled hitter can place the ball in a general direction. Hitters who can place a line drive up the middle, for example, or in the hole, are likely to get more hits.
by JonathanNathan on Jun 29, 2010 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I've often heard that,
and people always seem to be talking about certain hitters (Tony Gwynn) who could just aim for the hole between short and third, and things like that…
But as far as aiming a line drive, I don’t really think it’s possible to aim it in between the fielders… Sure, maybe you can aim to hit the ball to the opposite field by staying back a little bit, but the difference between hitting a line drive to the third baseman and a line drive in between third and short is so fractional, and the time of impact between bat and ball SO short (particularly assuming a line drive, where we already know it’s essentially on the sweet spot in a level swing), you’re gonna have a hard time convincing me such control is possible.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions
This is exactly right.
And it’s important to emphasize that part of what really had been missing is Cahill’s CONFIDENCE in throwing the curveball. Scouting reports had indicated from the minors that Cahill had a plus knuckle-curve which could be a devastating out pitch, but he scrapped the thing just months into his big league career after only throwing it a couple times. It seemed obvious to me that he must have thrown one bad one and given up a homerun (or even a long foul ball) or spiked a few two feet in front of the plate and decided that the pitch wouldn’t work against big league hitters.
This year, he’s back to throwing it confidently, and sure enough, he’s back to striking people out.
There was a time earlier in the year in his start in Detroit when he was just starting to get into the groove of throwing this curveball again, and he hung one and gave up a homerun to (I can’t remember the batter, someone RH, Cabrera? Inge?)… I remember being worried that he’d never want to throw the pitch again, but Kurt Suzuki came back and called three in a row right after that, until Cahill threw another good one in the zone.
Stuff like that makes me think we gotta give Captain Kurk a little credit.
Great stuff, I’m loving watching Cahill pitch, which is excited because I was so disappointed last year.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
*which is exciting...
words, words, words.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 8:39 AM PDT up reply actions
Not only should you give Captain Kurt a little credit,
but it also highlights the blending of the physical and non-physical (confidence) aspects of the game.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Cahill doesn’t have a good FIP or BABIP, but is that because of the ground balls he gets? I know we’ve talked about Cahill and luck quite a bit. Your FIP is going to be high if you get a lot of ground balls, right? Your BABIP is also going to be high if the batter creates weak contact on a ground ball, right?
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 29, 2010 9:26 AM PDT reply actions
The FIP stuff is a little difficult.
On the average, Ground balls and fly balls have a very similar run value, because ground balls often wind up as singles and fly balls occasionally end up over the fence. Because they’re pretty similar, FIP just lumps them into one category. But if you were able to consistently induce weaker grounders than the average grounder, then yes, you could “juke” FIP, so to speak. I expect a little regression, but it seems like Cahill is gonna be one of those guys who consistently outperforms his FIP, or to put it another way, is in the small minority of pitchers that FIP doesn’t describe accurately.
BABIP, though, is different. There’s no “good” or “bad” BABIP, really. It’s just a measure of how many balls in play ended up falling for hits, and we can use it to see how lucky a pitcher’s been. But if Cahill is indeed reliably and consistently inducing weak contact, the low BABIP isn’t just luck.
She lives by the wall, and waits by the door.
She walks in the sun, to me.
Cahill's tERA, which is supposed to account for differences in batted ball profiles, is 3.93
which is quite good. Not quite as good as his ERA, but again, a .235 BABIP is unsustainably low. Of course, it’s also true that Cahill has been improving recently, particularly with the curve and the heightened K rate, so maybe his peripherals will get better rather than the other way around here.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions
Well, tRA (or tERA) separates by batted ball type,
but again, it assumes that every grounder is average. It’s a good assumption for most, but if Cahill is indeed able to induce weak grounders consistently, he’d perform better than tERA expects him to.
She lives by the wall, and waits by the door.
She walks in the sun, to me.
Hence the low BABIP.
If Cahill is indeed able to produce weak grounders as a skill rather than a result of sample size and luck, then he’ll maintain the low BABIP.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Or "a" low BABIP
Maybe not quite as low as the one he currently has, but also not jumping to league average.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
This is pretty key.
I doubt he’ll keep the microscopic .235 he’s got now, but I also wouldn’t expect a full regression to THE mean (.300 ish). Just a regression to his mean, whatever it happens to be.
She lives by the wall, and waits by the door.
She walks in the sun, to me.
.236, hopefully.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
Can we deduce another reason for Cahill's lower BABIP?
Logically speaking, I would imagine that a pitcher who induces weak groundballs on a consistent basis yet displays slightly erratic command (BB/9 over 2.5) MAY be able to sustain a lower BABIP due to the amount of double plays induced. This is because the walks would A) not count as a ball in play and B) result inthe runner only getting to 1B (a key distinction as a ball in play could lead to a double and thus remove the possibility of a double play). If the proceeding result is a groundball on the infield, Cahill would then receive two outs for the price of one ball in play, thus lowering his BABIP.
If a pitcher were able to record just a few extra outs beyond the average pitcher, the effect to his BABIP could be fairly substantial (inthe context of lucky/unlucky conversation) especially considering the relatively small amount of innings pitched thus far.
by nobodyinparticular on Jun 29, 2010 11:45 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Eh, not really.
The concept goes that pitchers who are GB pitchers actually have higher BABIPs than pitchers who are FB pitchers. GBs are more likely to be hits while FBs are more likely to be extra base hits. Tim Hudson (.287 career BABIP) Webb (.317 BABIP) and Lowe (.298 BABIP) are three prominent groundball artists and they all have BABIPS around .300. Hudson is currently leading the league with a .235 BABIP this year though, which just shows how rare and unsustainable Cahill’s BABIP is.
To show this, Fangraphs uses different values for groundballs than flyballs to calculate expected BABIP:
BABIP by Type (2007):
Fly Balls – .15
Ground Balls – .24
Line Drives – .73
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
by lenscrafters on Jun 29, 2010 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Type of pitcher wasn't my point
It was the tandem of GB pitcher and erratic command (leading to double plays with only 1 ball in play rather than 2).
This probably doesn’t affect BABIP to much if any extent, but it was just a thought.
by nobodyinparticular on Jun 29, 2010 11:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Are his FIP and BABIP skewed because of his poor 1st start?
Just wondering. I mean, look at his overall totals, they go down drastically if you subtract that 1st game against the Jays.
-Yeah, I just posted that, but my opinion is apparently "wrong" a significant portion of the time though, so take it as you will.
Slider
Apparently Cahill was throwing still throwing his slider early this season, but has completely stopped throwing it the last 4 or 5 starts. Seems like a sign of increased confidence in/effectiveness of his new curve.
http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfxg.aspx?playerid=6249&position=P&season=2010&date=2010-05-05&dh=0
Cahill
Is he throwing a knucklecurve or regular curve/slider? I haven’t seen too many Cahill starts, so I’m in the dark.
by Colorado Fan on Jun 29, 2010 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions
He originally threw a knuckle curve,
but he ditched it in favor of a spike curve.
She lives by the wall, and waits by the door.
She walks in the sun, to me.
A "spike curve" refers to what the pitch looks like,
and a “knuckle curve” refers to how it’s thrown. Not sure if he did change grips or not, but there’s no reason why those couldn’t be the same pitch.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions
nice write-up man
When is Cahill’s next start anyways guys? Thurs or Friday?
"It's never 'just a game' if you're winning" - George Carlin
by bluelightrain84 on Jun 29, 2010 10:27 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Thursday.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Jun 29, 2010 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions
Nuts
I’m going to Friday and Saturday’s games and wanted to see him pitch. I do believe I saw him pitch last year in cleveland and he got banged around pretty good. Oh well, here’s to hoping the A’s sweep the Tribe regardless!
"It's never 'just a game' if you're winning" - George Carlin
by bluelightrain84 on Jun 29, 2010 10:52 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Is he getting a lot of swing and misses
or would his pitches be strikes anyways if the batter didn’t swing? It seemed like the Pirates helped Cahill a lot by swing at pitches out of the zone. Perhaps other teams have done the same? I don’t have any data, just wondering.
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
This is an accurate assessment.
In fact, Cahill has thrown FEWER balls in the zone this year than last year, 43.8% this year to 47.9% last year. His swings at balls out of the zone however has increased astronomically from 21.6 % to 29.2%. His first pitch strike and swinging strike percentages have also gone up marginally.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions
Just looked up some context for those numbers:
Were he to qualify, that 43.8 zone percentage would actually be tied with Aaron Harang for the 14th worst in baseball, just better than Joe Saunders. All the pitchers up there with the lowest percentages of balls in zone also have excellent swinging percentages on balls in zone, so it’s possibly that there could actually be some reverse correlation where these pitchers are throwing more balls outside of the zone BECAUSE they know that hitters are swinging at them.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, my chief worry is that Cahill's performance
will dip considerably if batters simply start taking more.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Something that I remember was often a problem for Tim Hudson when he would face more patient teams.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions
I remember thinking that about Houston Street
it seemed like even his fastball would dip below the zone if players starting taking pitches.
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
Hudson's biggest weakness
has always been the lack of a breaking pitch he can throw consistently for strikes. His splitter obviously drops out of the zone. But his slider is also a “swing and miss” pitch. The bad games of his I remember involved him having trouble getting ahead with his sinker, and hitters saying, “Well, I’ll just take until he has to lay one in there” because the sinker is the only pitch he can consistently throw in the strike zone.
I haven’t seen him much since he went to Atlanta. It’s possible he’s changed somewhat since he was with the A’s and I was seeing him pitch pretty regularly on tv.
"And Julio Franco is batting right-handed!" -- Wayne Hagin, A's radio play-by-play, mid-80s
I think he can start throwing the 4 seam for strikes if teams try to walk their way on base.
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."
that would be a good way to adapt and adjust
hopefully he can command the 4 seamer for strikes on the corners. No reason to do so right now if the teams are swinging at balls outside the zone anyways.
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
Honestly I'd prefer he just throw the 2 seamer for strikes.
It seems that almost every time he throws the 4 seamer he overthrows it, not to mention it’s much more likely to get hit hard than the 2 seamer if it is swung at.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions
but can he throw his 2 seamer for strikes
considering how much movement he gets?
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
Not sure, but check out the release point graph here:
http://www.fangraphs.com/pitchfxg.aspx?playerid=6249&position=P&season=2010&date=2010-06-26&dh=0
Even in Cahill’s best start of his career, his release point for his 4 seamer (the green dots) is totally off.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not sure that release point is off
Look at all his release point graphs and he always throws his 4 seam fastball more over-the-top than the rest of his pitches.
The monster at the end of this blog.
He has been.
He’s even backdooring it to lefties, which makes it look like it’s gonna hit the batter before turning and clipping the zone.
She lives by the wall, and waits by the door.
She walks in the sun, to me.
Isn't that the frontdoor...?
I’m sure this terminology is always fluid, but I always though the “backdoor” was the outside corner.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I always thought of backdoor as near the ass.
but I’m a perv.
by LoneStranger on Jun 29, 2010 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I could be wrong too,
but from what I understand, a frontdoor pitch starts in the zone and dives out of it at the end, in an attempt to draw a swinging strike. A backdoor pitch starts outside and dives in the zone at the end, in an attempt to get a guy to take a called strike.
She lives by the wall, and waits by the door.
She walks in the sun, to me.
See the only time I've ever heard anyone call a pitch "frontdoor" in a game
is Duchscherer (or others who do it) throwing a “frontdoor” cutter on the inside corner to a righty… (or a frontdoor slider…)
But I’m happy to believe your definition over the grammatical genius of Chef Fosse.
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah
I just saw highlights from the game and the 1st 2 K’s they showed were called strikes low in the zone. That probably set up the hitters to swing at pitches out of the zone later.
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
great stuff again Dan
interestingly, his lefty splits are way better this year. last year in 405 batters faced he gave up over 2 HR per 9 and walked almost 4 per 9. (FIP of 6.52 xFIP 5.31)
Almost across the board improvements (in 1/4 the time of course)
"The ego, the super-ego, and the Ed" - dannycakes
Excellent post
I was hoping you’d follow up your earlier post on Cahill. Thanks.
"You know, a long time ago being crazy meant something. Nowadays everybody's crazy."
-Charles Manson
As always, very interesting stuff!
Although charts and tables hurt my eyes after spending ten days completely free of PC and with any and all analytical thinking related solely to choosing a cliff to dive from and a fish to grill.
ACK!
Slusser says Braden is dealing with “elbow stuff” and won’t pitch today.
http://twitter.com/susanslusser
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
I posted this in the other thread, but what if this is a way to get him to pitch in the Yankees series?
He’d have to go on short rest to make it by Wednesday, but it could be a ‘business decision.’
by LoneStranger on Jun 29, 2010 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Slusser tweeted again
Geren hopes Braden could go Saturday.
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
Right, I should have said that in my comment. Saturday to Wednesday is one day less rest.
by LoneStranger on Jun 29, 2010 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions
That'd be awesome
I’d go and buy one of these.
@MAD_Marvin
The FairWeather Channel - Sports Comics and Bandwagon Forecast
by Hit4TheCycle on Jun 29, 2010 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions
So do we know who is pitching instead?
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Mazzaro
"Life is a horizontal fall" -Jean Cocteau
by King Richard on Jun 29, 2010 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Ah, crap.
I even had I nice poetic game thread all ready, because it’s been exactly 51 days since his perfect game.
She lives by the wall, and waits by the door.
She walks in the sun, to me.
Hmm, did you just happen to count the days between May 9 and today?
Or maybe that’s a regular thing with you numbers guys.
by whiteshoes40 on Jun 29, 2010 3:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Sigh.
Dallas Braden was scratched from Tuesday’s start against the Orioles due to a stiff elbow.
Doesn’t sound good, but A’s manager Bob Geren is optimistic that Braden will be able to start against the Indians on Saturday. For what it’s worth, Braden is 0-5 with a 4.31 ERA since his perfect game on May 9. He’s pretty much who we thought he was.
Shut it, Rotoworld.
by whiteshoes40 on Jun 29, 2010 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Is that a AZ Cardinals reference?
If so…why?
She lives by the wall, and waits by the door.
She walks in the sun, to me.
This is all great news
Except I wonder if he’s throwing that many curveballs, how much does it increase his injury risk. I love seeing him pound the sinker, though.
"PECOTA can pretty much kiss my ass."-Nico
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Athletics Nation
Related FanShots on Athletics Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Get a grip: Reds’ Todd Frazier loses bat, still connects for home run (Video)
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
