How Do You Solve A Problem Like Trevor Cahill? (Mechanics)
Much has been made about Trevor Cahill's struggles this year. Let's not kid ourselves, he's having a pretty tough year. Although not as tough as Craig Breslow, Cahill has shown a major kink in his Lego armor. And with injuries making the starting rotation as bare as the downtown of Gary, Ind. these struggles have only been magnified. Sure the once exception to the sabermetric rule, which is now being held by Moscoso (I swear it's Black Venezuelan Magic), was going to regress as some point it time. But this much? I don't think Trevor's problems are the numbers. I would wager that he will, at some point in time, get close to where he was. I think the answer is as simple as his mechanics.
Now I am going to take this moment to make a disclaimer: I am not Curt Young or Dave Duncan, and I hopefully don't try to make myself sound like one. I have been lucky enough to play highly competitive baseball at every amateur level and having coached this aspect of the game for the last 3-4 years, I think I have a slightly better working knowledge of pitching than the average fan. Now, onto the rest of the post.
Baseball is simple. Even more so than the basic breakdown of "see ball, hit ball, throw ball." Baseball is simply straight lines and angles. A geometric dream and a right-brain nightmare. When it comes to pitching the idea of straight lines is paramount.
At the high school that I used to coach at we broke pitching into six component parts:
1- Start (wind-up or stretch)
2- Drop Step
3- Balance
4- Power
5- Tuck Turn
6- Extend and Finish
All of those should be pretty self-explanatory for those who watch/or have watched any baseball. The one I want to focus on with Trevor Cahill is the milisecond between numbers 4 and 5.
The power position is the point of the delivery where the pitchers front foot has landed and they are in the preffered posistion of making the 'goal posts' or the 'L' (read: not the way Tyler Clippard is). The 'Tuck Turn' comes moments after when the pitcher will bring his glove to his chest, or vice-versa, and exlpode with the hips (much like hitting the baseball). And it is here where I feel Trevor is having problems.
The problem that you will find between numbers 4 and 5 is, for some reason, the front side blows out and and the arm drags through the zone. After that one of two things will happen; 1)if the pitcher is holding on the the ball to hard and will pull it to opposite side of the plate (for Trevor outside on a righty) or 2) the arm drags and the ball is left arm side. Either way, it leads to wildness.
Trevor, much like Chen-Ming Wang, is a sinker ball pithcer. Part of being the sabermetric darling was the fact that he kept the ball low and induced weak contact. But when you start leaving that sinker up, you get hit hard. You saw this with Chen-Ming Wang post groin injury. He would 'jump' off the rubber trying to not only get on top of the ball but to also get pressure off his leg. Subsequently he got drilled.
Have a gander at these two strike-zone plots of Trevor from BrooksBaseball.net:
The first graph was his start last night and the second one was his start against the White Sox when he lasted only two inning. A bit of cherry-picking, I know, but they illustarte my point perfectly. Looking at the graphs you notice how last night his pitches clustered lower in the zone and on the corners, whereas against the CWS they clustered up in the zone where where it is much, much easier to hit a sinker, let alone any pitch.
And that's where the straight lines in pitching come into play. If Trevor squares the front shoulder to the plate and stays through the pitch, he's untouchable. It's when he tries to make the perfect pitch or simply does not repeat his delivery, he gets shelled. There is hope for having old Trevor back. Hopefully he can work on this with what is left of the season and during the off-season.
Again, I am not a pitching guru....yet. Simply diagnosing what I see.
29 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So, are you saying that
his mechanics were good in his last start and poor in his June start?
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
I guess writing the first comment is not a guarantee to get an answer
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
I'll hazard a guess: Yes.
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 find it to be an important question
I see two possibilities.
1) OP watches the game in June. As soon as the game starts, before Cahill actually runs into any trouble, he turns and says to his wife: “Honey, this is going to be a long evening. Cahill’s mechanics are not good today”. He remembers that game. Then he watches a game in August and has a good feeling from the get go: “Hun, it will be a much better evening today, because I noticed Cahill doesn’t do his arm drag today”.
2) OP has a good idea of pitching mechanics and notices certain irregularities when he watches Cahill’s delivery. They are rather intermittent, more obvious on some pitches and less obvious on others. He doesn’t specifically remember noticing them as more obvious in June game than they were in August game.
If 1) is the case, it is an extremely astute observation and excellent ability to predict performance on a day-to-day basis.
If the case is 2) it is still a good observation by someone who has good knowledge of the matter. However, the narrative is built around the observed result. He feels that Cahill has mechanical problems as described. He sees that on some days he had better results than on the others. The conclusion is made that on the days with good results Cahill had good mechanics, and on days with poor results he had poor mechanics. But this is reverse engineering and not observation and if this is the case, than these graphs are just misleading.
2011 Oakland Athletics: We have Cy Young pitchers and make yours look like it, too
This is where I am on this post as well
I vibrated with joy that join A's. -- Kim Seong-min
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 29, 2011 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions
Right or wrong, questions like the one you aim to attack
and fanposts like this are why I love baseball and baseball analysis. Thanks for taking the time and effort!
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
Interesting Write-up
I have a couple follow-up questions.
1. If Cahill’s problem is transitioning into the “Tuck Turn,” is his opening up the front side too quickly or dragging the arm through? Or is he doing both an completely inconsistent?
2. Can you see what else he’s doing differently that might be causing the issue between points 4 and 5?
1) I think it’s the arm drag that is causing him problems, but he is doing both pretty inconsistently, IMO. With the sinker, mainly and pretty much every other pitch, if the arm drags behind the body you aren’t able to get the downward plane (what is called “staying on top of the pitch”) and the ball flattens out.
2) Currently working on this.
ken korach's voice is like peanut butter on velvet, not joe buck's.
Just an additional piece to the observation
Cahill has some sort of timing/rhythm mechanism where he takes the ball slightly out and back in the glove during his delivery. I thought I noticed he pitched with better location when he did that more noticeably and wonder if that might help him keep the right mechanics in the area you’re talking about.
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 have noticed that many times...
Certainly something to look into.
ken korach's voice is like peanut butter on velvet, not joe buck's.
by mrbendy on Aug 26, 2011 5:01 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Flibbertygibbet!
Being wrong about something you’ve worked on is a blessing, not a curse, and people are so invested in being right that that gets lost. —Graham MacAree
Send her to some old geezer's house.
He’ll straighten her out. A little cooking, cleaning, and raising his brats should do the trick.
"Trying not to rec a "F**k the Giants" post is like trying not to look at boobs."
I think you might be Curt Young
Excellent analysis. Hopefully someone in the current laundry room will take a look at this. Now how do we solve the Breslow problem?
The greenmachine
BUILD ON THE MOON!
Now all of our “offense with no power” problems would be solved.
ken korach's voice is like peanut butter on velvet, not joe buck's.
Do you have any image / highlight evidence
to help edumicate the crowd?
Currently also working on this.
ken korach's voice is like peanut butter on velvet, not joe buck's.
when I saw the headline for this fanpost
I immediately heard it to music, in fact, the song from “The Sound of Music” that goes like “How do you solve a problem like Maria?”
How do you solve a problem like a Trevor?
How do you make him keep his pitches down?
How do you find a word that means a Trevor?
Unsustainable FIP! a pterodactyl! a Lego!
Being wrong about something you’ve worked on is a blessing, not a curse, and people are so invested in being right that that gets lost. —Graham MacAree
by iglew on Aug 27, 2011 12:45 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Cahill is currently the 22nd best SP in the AL according to xFIP
So is the problem really mechanics, or just putting a good defense behind him?
They're not mutually exclusive
He’s also walking way too many hitters.
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
That's true, but maybe we are overestimating his ceiling?
His K rate has also gotten a lot better along with his walk rate getting worse, so logically that would lead to him challenging more hitters, or being more confident in his approach.
But maybe he’s just a Jon Garland-type? I don’t know what the general expectations of him are but he doesn’t appear to be an ace, more a solid 2-3 type, like Garland was at his age. I’m perfectly happy wit having him in the rotation, I’d trade him for someone like Jay Bruce, but that’s not going to happen. He’s not bad, he’s no Halladay or true stud, but he’s decent. Sure the walks need to come down, but at the expense of the K’s? In my opinion, he’s still very young and learning, so its difficult to figure him out.
It is certainly possible that he's a Jon Garland type
However, his minor league numbers parallel Brandon Webb’s probably better than anyone’s (with the one exception that Cahill put up similar numbers to Webb at younger ages at each level, which is a good thing).
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 seems like he's a lot better than Jon Garland.
Garland hardly struck anyone out and didn’t induce many ground balls. Cahill strikes people out and induces lots of ground balls.
I’m not sure what you mean by a “solid 2-3 type” but if you mean a slightly above average pitcher who isn’t an All-Star in most years then I agree that’s what he is today. I still think he has a chance to improve since he’s young and had excellent minor league numbers. He’s improved every year he’s been pitching by SIERA.
I vibrated with joy that join A's. -- Kim Seong-min
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 29, 2011 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions
This is a really interesting issue. I'll watch for what you discussed the next time I see
Trevor pitch. It might help to look at film from 2010 as well, when he had better control, but as PL78 pointed out he wasn’t striking out as many then.
If his problem was really a matter of leaving pitches higher in the zone, you’d expect his GB% to take more of a hit than his BB%, but it doesn’t seem like that’s been the case.
I vibrated with joy that join A's. -- Kim Seong-min
by WaddellCanseco on Aug 29, 2011 11:50 AM PDT reply actions

by 





























