Giants likely to increase marketing of Smith and Watson

[rog]

The signing of Andrew Miller narrows the field of top available lefty relievers, clearing the decks for the Giants to get serious about trading southpaw relievers Will Smith and/or Tony Watson.  There is a factor that will limit the trade value of each of those two guys -- just as it minimizes the value of Madison Bumgarner.

All three lefties are under team control for only one more season.  The Giants need multiple outfielders, and especially if they decide not to trade Bumgarner, they have precious little to offer for them.  AT&T Park limits them with power bats.  Having little to trade limits the preferred strategy of trading pitchers for bats.

The Giants have dug themselves a big hole.  I asked the question of whether the Giants are the worst team in the NL West.  Didn't get an answer, but one could make an argument in that direction.

The Giants need a rebuild.  The ownership wants to "keep" winning, even though they haven't come very close over the past two and a half seasons.  Farhan has the challenge of serving two masters, which tends not to work out well.  I have faith that he can do so as well as almost anyone.  And faith that he will convince the Giants of their evil ways quickly if things don't work out on the retool front.

The Giants are already at least one year late in rebuilding.  I hope we know soon what the direction is.  But I'm much more concerned about the direction is than whether it becomes apparent now or in 2019.

[rog]

When Randy said that Rule 5 Draftees with a low 90's fastball were a joke, I mentioned that movement was often as important to a fastball as speed, and that Travis Bergen had the very high spin rate that would normally be associated with movement. Turns out there is another advantage Travis' fastball might have.

We know that today's swing, descended from Ted Williams and recently becoming the big thing in swing change, is designed to provide a higher launch angle. The idea is that the higher launch angle allows the ball to get higher in the air and thus able to provide more power.

The way pitchers are combating this swing? One is more secondary pitches to upset the timing of the hitter and make the fastball appear faster to the hitter. A second is to throw the HIGH fastball, since it makes it harder for the slightly elevating swing to catch up to the pitch.

It may be that Bergen is able to play on an aspect that adds further yet to the high fastball. A low release point means the ball has less downward tilt. The batter's frame of reference starts out lower, and the actual plane of the pitch is higher, increasing the difficulty in catching up.

To begin with, Bergen is only 6-foot-1, when most of today's pitchers are taller (although notice how the shorter pitcher seems to be coming back into the game a little?). Generally speaking, a shorter pitcher usually has a lower release point, especially since taller pitchers are taught early on to take advantage of their size and higher release point to provide downward tilt. In addition, Bergen has a lot of bend, lowering his release point further. His release point isn't Tom Seaver low (How many are, unless the pitcher is a side armer or a submariner?), but you're getting the idea.

Nine of the top 10 pitchers last season in terms of low batting average against the fastball were pitchers with a below-average release point.

So with regard to Bergen's being a joke, we've found that there isn't just one ameliorating factor (movement) to Bergen's fastball, but a second (low release point). It appears the Giants did their homework.

So now, let's look at how higher launch angle and lower release point relate to the advantages of analytics.

If we had started out by calling higher launch angle what it is in its simplest form, traditionalists would have a much easier time with it. That's because launch angle is simply a way of measuring what Ted Williams recommended seven decades ago when he suggested a slightly upward swing that would mirror the angle of the arriving pitch.

To the traditionalist, Ted Williams' slightly elevated swing sounds like a GOOD thing, since Ted is arguably the best hitter the game has ever seen, and a hitter many traditionalist saw either with their naked eye or live on TV. In contrast, launch angle is something new, and since it involves angles that are measured in numbers, it sounds like new-fangled analytics, which weren't around back when baseball was a real game.

In reality, what launch angle did was take Williams' concept and define the launch angle from which most home runs are delivered. Analytics took a good general principal from what might be called the godfather of hitting and converted it into specific angles of success.

Same thing with release point. We think of Seaver when one talks about leg bend and push off the mound. Now the simple analytics of release point measures exactly how high the release comes from, and the lower release point is identified an important factor in the new analytics buzz word "effective velocity." The release point is quantified.

And since the release is quantified horizontally as well as vertically, we can see a chart of precisely where a pitcher throws his pitches from. Is it consistent so as to promote control and command? Does it differ from pitch type to pitch type, which can give the hitter an early identifier?

I have mentioned that analytics can take a traditionalist's shotgun and make it into more of a rifle by more precisely identifying the important factors.

The pitcher wants more effective velocity on his fastball. How does he do that?

First, Warren Spahn said that pitching was the art of destroying the batters' timing. A wider variety of speeds, which can be MEASURED (why else would Randy know that Bergen had a "low 90's fastball?). That gives the pitcher a more precise indicator of one of the factors that help increase effective velocity.

Second, a higher fastball is harder to catch up to than a lower fastball, giving the higher fastball more EFFECTIVE velocity. A chart of the location of a pitcher's pitches shows how consistently he elevates his fastball.

Third, the more consistent the arm speed of a pitcher's various pitches, the harder it is to pick up early what type of pitch is coming. Arm speed can be measured.

Fourth, the faster the arm speed, usually the faster the fastball.

Fifth, the lower the release point, the less prepared the hitter is to catch up to the fastball, since it has a flatter plane to combat the upward plane of the elevated swing. The release point can be measured.

Sixth, the more consistent the release point, the better the control and command.

Seventh, the more consistent the release point between pitches, the harder it is for the batter to determine the pitch type early.

Eighth, effective pitch sequencing can improve effective velocity both because it is harder for a hitter to catch up to a fastball if he isn't expecting it, and because the better the pitch sequencing, the harder the pitch type is to predict.'

Ninth, more spin usually increases movement on the fastball, and the spin can be measured -- as can the horizontal and vertical movement of the pitch.

Little question that in a vacum, more velocity is better. But as we can see above, there are at least nine factors than increase EFFECTIVE velocity, making the fastball harder to hit.

Candace Bergen received strong reviews for her delivery in a support role in the movie "Carnal Knowledge." Perhaps Travis Bergen will receive passing reviews for his support role in the Giants pitching staff's delivery of effective velocity.

[klaiggeb]

With that type of swing, pitchers are also elevating more.

Well, not all pitchers.

Not the Giant pitchers, mind you, they're still, outside of Rodriguez, trying to work the bottom of the zone...which plays right into the hands of the new swing.

I was very disappointing with our pitching coach last year.

With all the rhetoric we got on sabermetrics, it seemed HE was the only one still preaching "down" on every pitch.

Either that or our clods couldn't execute.

You choose.

Me?

I'll just remain disgusted

[rog]

On the MLB Network I saw a fabulous example of an at bat in which AL Cy Young Award winner Blake Snell first threw a high fastball right on the outside corner. Then from the same tunnel, he threw a low change up right on the same corner. Then yet again from the same tunnel, he threw a sweeping breaking ball that broke to the inside and just below the zone. Slam, bam, thank you maam. Or in the words of Mike Krukow, good morning, good afternoon and good night.

The pitches were strong pitches, well-located, and coming out of the same tunnel. It was almost impossible for the batter to recognize them in time.

[rog]

With that type of swing, pitchers are also elevating more.

Indeed they are. In fact, I placed it #2 on my list.

Pitchers are now throwing FEWER fastballs, but elevating them more. Add that to the effective velocity added by using them less often and thus being less predictable, and they're doing a good job of counteracting the "new" (if we consider Ted Williams to be new) swing. I'm taking pitchers overall, not necessarily the Giants' pitchers.





Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4980/giants-increase-marketing-smith-watson?page=1#ixzz5aX3RR5KJ

[sfgdood]

And YET...Toronto still thought little enough of him to make him readily available to every other team for nothing

[rog]

What the heck is your point, Randy? The more I read about Bergen, the better he looks. Any Rule 5 Draft pick is a gamble, but I think Bergen is a good one. I'm getting a little higher on Ferguson too, but I haven't found anything to get excited about with the waiver claim outfielder Gerber.

I'm not sure why you're being so criticial of Bergen, Randy, when you really know very little about him. Good players sometimes get exposed, and it is somewhat understandable that a pitcher who has had injury problems and doesn't throw hard would be a pitcher a team would gamble might not be drafted. It's pretty easy for the Giants to have to protect 40 players, but not so easy for other teams with a better farm system.

How many scouting reports on Bergen have you read, Randy? I don't think I'm up to 10 yet, but I'm getting there. How many videos of him have you watched?

I also get the impression you don't know all that much about effective velocity, although it is something teams are working hard on. Now that teams are getting smarter about their own players and the players of other teams, they are trying to take advantage of the information explosion to further develop their own players.

Given that the Giants don't have a lot to trade, and do have a lot of needs, internal development seems like a good strategy for them.

Do you honestly know enough about Bergen to rationally criticize him, Randy?

[rog]

Do Smith and Watson sound more like a detective agency, a law firm, or a gun company?

[sfgdood]

I'm not sure why you're being so criticial of Bergen, Randy, when you really know very little about him.

Dood - as I said...those that know the most about him are the guys who were perfectly happy to give him up for nothing.

[rog]

I get what you're saying here, Randy, but there are at least two flaws in your logic:

First, you yourself know about as much about Bergen as you know about most topics you discuss.

Second, your statement that the Blue Jays were perfectly happy to give him up for nothing was wrong on at least two counts. They weren't HAPPY to lose him, but they could protect only 40 players. They didn't give him up for nothing.

I think you have the capacity to keep up here, Randy. It shouldn't be all that hard.