What's All the Fuss? Part 2
Part 1 took a look at Daniel Cabrera and his stuff. Now we turn to another pitcher who has received a notable amount of attention this off season - Derrick Turnbow. In Turnbow's case, the "stuff" as the reason for that attention makes a more compelling case.
You can check out Part 1 for some basic definitions - and overall averages - for some of the metrics I'll present here.
Hard throwers with a reputation to save games are almost always in demand. Let's look at Turnbow from 2005-2008, plus his 2009 Marcel projections (all from Fangraphs.com). I'm going back that 4th year since he barely pitched in 2008.
IP 67.1 56.1 68.0 6.1 35.0* Saves 39 24 1 1 3* FIP 3.20 4.83 3.65 10.24 4.47* K/9 8.55 11.02 11.12 7.11 9.26* K/BB 2.67 1.77 1.83 0.38 1.70*
Derrick Turnbow is a big righty - 6'3" - and throws hard. He'll strike guys out, but he'll walk them like crazy, too. So, what's he throwing?
| cfx | # | mph | pfx_x | pfx_z | rpm |
| CH | 2 | 85.9 | -3.2 | 6.4 | 892 |
| FA | 453 | 95.6 | -1.3 | 8.7 | 1,247 |
| SV | 144 | 85.0 | 0.7 | -1.9 | 373 |
That change is a rare treat, and will be left out of the analysis, for the most part. The SV is a slurve, which is what Turnbow calls it. Probably more towards the slider end of the spectrum, thrown overhand. Actually, he may be more over-the-top with the slurve than the fastball. That fastball is mostly a four-seamer (that naturally "cuts", but I think, again, that's mostly arm angle), but I believe he's thrown two-seamers on occasion. More on those release points in a second ....
The sample for 2008 is limited, but he lost some velocity.
Slurve: 85.5 in 2007 to 82.6 in 2008
Fastball: 96.1 to 94.4
He was still throwing hard, and we'll see if he recovers his velocity in 2009. BTW, if my speeds look higher than what you see elsewhere, they are. That's because I've adjusted it back to 55 ft from home plate. What is typically shown, either on Gameday or on a radar gun, is more like 40-50 ft. from the plate. Also note, in PITCHf/x, the release points are volatile/noisy as are the start speeds. End speeds (mph at home plate) tend to be more stable.....but I digress....back to release points.
The inset below shows only his Miller Park games, for illustration purposes (eliminated park-to-park noise). The difference in fastball and slurve release points is consistent game to game, and park to park etc.
Before I go any further, you need to see this. That slurve - it's nasty. The whiff rate is through the roof. The fastball, sadly, is maybe a little tougher than average, but he's exceptionally wild with it. Severely unable to throw it for a strike consistently. He's also not really fooling anyone.
| cfx | # | LHH | RHH | Swing | Whiff | B:CS | ISZ | Paint | Chase | Watch |
| CH | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0.500 | 0.000 | 0.500 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | |
| FA | 453 | 164 | 289 | 0.415 | 0.176 | 3.1 | 0.406 | 0.077 | 0.223 | 0.304 |
| SV | 144 | 63 | 81 | 0.382 | 0.564 | 2.7 | 0.306 | 0.069 | 0.330 | 0.500 |
| 599 | 229 | 370 | 0.407 | 0.262 | 3.0 | 0.382 | 0.075 | 0.251 | 0.341 |
Let's take a look at spin movement and flight paths. To give you an idea of how nasty that slurve can be (breaking hard at 85mph), there are two sets - the slurve is the same in each, but, one contains high fastballs (hFA) - any fastball that arrived at home plate more than 3 ft. off the ground.
I think this is important to note - if you can disguise your breaking stuff as a high fastball, you can do pretty well. Just a thought.
Turnbow's other problem - command being the biggest - is the reliance on the fastball. If he's behind, you can just about always sit on it. Here are his pitch selections by count.
| # | B | S | CH | FA | SV |
| 159 | 0 | 0 | 0.0000 | 0.8239 | 0.1761 |
| 58 | 0 | 1 | 0.0172 | 0.4310 | 0.5517 |
| 24 | 0 | 2 | 0.0417 | 0.2917 | 0.6667 |
| 80 | 1 | 0 | 0.0000 | 0.9000 | 0.1000 |
| 62 | 1 | 1 | 0.0000 | 0.6935 | 0.3065 |
| 37 | 1 | 2 | 0.0000 | 0.3514 | 0.6486 |
| 35 | 2 | 0 | 0.0000 | 0.9714 | 0.0286 |
| 40 | 2 | 1 | 0.0000 | 0.9250 | 0.0750 |
| 39 | 2 | 2 | 0.0000 | 0.6923 | 0.3077 |
| 15 | 3 | 0 | 0.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.0000 |
| 22 | 3 | 1 | 0.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.0000 |
| 28 | 3 | 2 | 0.0000 | 0.9643 | 0.0357 |
He also seems unable, or unwilling, to throw many pitches that aren't up and away. Particularly against lefties.
Very rarely does he go down and in for a strike.
I can see why teams are interested. He stacked up a lot of saves at one time, which tricks some into thinking he was better than he actually was. He throws hard, he's big, and has a nasty nasty breaking pitch. But hitters will get too many chances where the pitch and location may be easy to narrow down. Usually, that location is out of the zone.
0 recs |
37 comments
Comments
Awesome post, Harry. The flight path on the slurve looks incredibly nasty. Did anyone see his minor league numbers when he went back down? It looks like he totally melted down. In just 18 innings he walked 41 hitters. Ouch.
/deer head
Bay City Ball
by xanthan on Dec 22, 2008 11:49 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I watched him one game in Nash
he walked the bases loaded and it was raining, so we left with a fading chorus of boos in the background. Very depressing.
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 22, 2008 12:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He has no control
He’s like Rich Hill
by Harry Pavlidis on Dec 22, 2008 12:18 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
except for the numerous glaring differences between him and rich hill, of course.
Space.
It's a problem we face.
So we never go anywhere.
We just stay in one place.
by hazel on Dec 22, 2008 5:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just in terms of control
or lack thereof.
by Harry Pavlidis on Dec 22, 2008 5:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Question
First off – great stuff
2nd – is Turnblow’s slurve nastier than Lidge’s slider?
I remember watching Turnblow in his little heydey and the slurve is just filthy but your sentence above nails it – batters started to lay off it and just waited for his fastball to find the strike zone.
I don’t know if a contending team could tolerate his volatility in their bullpen.
by Jason Collette on Dec 22, 2008 12:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Define nasty :-)
Lidge’s slider has a whiff rate of .510, so that’s pretty close (and from a larger sample, too). ISZ is .418 and Paint is .087 – he actually has a B:CS of 1.7, which is better than his fastball (2.8).
by Harry Pavlidis on Dec 22, 2008 1:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
he's a guy who is either off or on
He seems to need a sports psychologist or even a hypnotist and I’m not joking.
by ol Pete on Dec 22, 2008 1:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Matt Garza went to one and was suddenly way better afterward. Probably a coincidence, but it's a nice story.
by R.J. Anderson on Dec 22, 2008 1:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Garza is an attitude case
so I can see it helping
by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 22, 2008 1:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Harry what program do you use for your graphing?
Is it R?
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's
by iamawesomer on Dec 22, 2008 5:10 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Ah didn't know Excel was that capable.
Thanks.
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's
by iamawesomer on Dec 22, 2008 5:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Chris and yourself need to give the rest of us tutorials on pretty graphing :<
by R.J. Anderson on Dec 22, 2008 5:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I use MSPaint.exe
/deer head
Bay City Ball
by xanthan on Dec 22, 2008 6:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Me too!

Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's
by iamawesomer on Dec 22, 2008 7:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you just make that?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 22, 2008 7:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
I’m quite experienced in mspaint graphing.
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's
by iamawesomer on Dec 22, 2008 7:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What might be a good way to measure the command of a pitcher?
ISZ and Paint aren’t exactly what we’re looking for, because pitchers will intentionally keep the ball out of the zone if the pitch can get crushed. And no pitcher will every throw all strikes for game theory purposes.
Might we be able to measure tightness of clusters somehow? Other ideas?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 22, 2008 6:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
True
It is not very easy, unless you know the target. One of the topics discussed at the PITCHf/x Summit was the measuring of outcomes vs. the measuring of intentions. That was a slider on the paint. Maybe it was supposed to be in the dirt and a foot outside.
By cluster tightness – do you mean the plate locations or the movement or …. ?
by Harry Pavlidis on Dec 22, 2008 6:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I meant locations.
But movement and release point would also matter, good ideas.
In simplest terms, I’m thinking you take the strike zone and divide it into an outer region and an inner region. Nobody aims right down the middle, so you find the ratio of “middle strikes” to “edge strikes”, the lower the better for command. Or you do something similar comparing pitches that are strikes or within three (?) inches of being a strike (which were likely aimed right at the edge) with number of pitches way out of the strike zone. Of course, some pitches are aimed way out of the strike zone. But for many pitch types from one pitcher, those locations will be consistent, so that’s where clustering comes into play.
Also, another problem for breaking balls would be lack of proper break. If a slider was aimed well outside the zone but went over the corner, it might have been because it didn’t break or it might have been because it was thrown too far over the plate and broke over the edge. Since we know the spin on each pitch and how much it actually broke, we can potentially correct for these things if need be for an analysis.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Dec 22, 2008 7:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If nobody aims down the middle
wouldn’t it be a good idea to aim down the middle occasionally (from a game theory perspective)? That is unless you think any player can hit a pitch right down the middle even when not expecting it.
Can't get enough of the Oakland A's? Visit Oaktown Awesomer's
by iamawesomer on Dec 22, 2008 7:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
DBow would miss..
Trust me, half his stuff probably was meant for right down the pipe but ended up tits high and outside.
by SgtClueLs on Dec 23, 2008 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
How about percentage of strikes on balls outside the zone? Pitchers typically have pretty strong patterns on pitches outside the zone that they use to get strikes.
by ol Pete on Dec 23, 2008 1:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Chase
That covers swings outside the zone. I don’t break it down to strikes, since, in “theory”, unless you’re Vlad, you’ll do less with a ball out of the zone, even if you do make clean contact, it isn’t likely to be solid.
I’ve done something on a topic called “Fools”. Others have done similar work – basically, how deceptive is a pitcher? Can we measure that with the chase and watch metrics?
by Harry Pavlidis on Dec 23, 2008 9:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Watching Turnbow over the past four years
He has an incredible lack of ability to pitch with runners on base. His splits back it up, especially in 2006 and later in 2007. He cannot be put in a game with runners on, and it might be a good strategy to invoke the 1 baserunner rule on him— somebody gets on and he’s out. It seems ridiculous, but that’s how the guy pitches.
When he was terrible late in 2006, the stuff was there and guys were swinging and missing, but the control was just off. He got it back for most of 2007. Then in 2008 in 7 innings, guys were just crushing his fastball and he didn’t throw the breaking ball as much. Then he went to the minors and walked about 25/9ip.
He had surgery on his arm last year. He’s worth a gamble for a non-contending team on a minor league contract, but I think it’s a mistake to guarantee him a roster spot.
Also, I’m no mechanics expert, but Turnbow has a unique throwing motion. He just sets, doesn’t really lift his leg, and just fires it. It’s hard to describe until you watch him.
He was really fun to watch back in his 2005 heyday, I hope he gets it back someday— preferably in the AL somewhere.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Dec 22, 2008 8:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Here is some video of him warming up. I’m not sure if that is a Nashville Sounds uni. He’s not really winging it either. When he does he has that big fall off to the first base side.
by ol Pete on Dec 23, 2008 1:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Does he only work out of the stretch?
by Harry Pavlidis on Dec 22, 2008 8:33 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
OK, so, what's his deal?
If he’s not changing his delivery, why all the issues with men on base? Focus?
by Harry Pavlidis on Dec 23, 2008 11:39 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
We've been trying to figure this out for about 2 years now.
No clue. He just falls apart for some reason.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
by Jordan M on Dec 23, 2008 4:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I always thought it was because he's so wound up.
He always reminded me of John Rocker. Guys that are so wound up seem to have short periods of immense success before blowing up. Maybe nerves is the problem?
Jihad brought up the 1 runner on base rule. I was always in favor of the 2 runners on base rule with Turnbow. He operated pretty well (until the end) with the bases clear, and he was pitiful with any runners on. But the only thing that the 1 runner rule would do is add pressure on him. All of the sudden, he wouldn’t be able to get runners out, even if the bases were empty.
by tcyoung on Dec 26, 2008 11:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Injury
Didn’t Turnbow tear his rotator cuff last season? Will he even be ready to pitch in 2009?
by richardhkirkando on Dec 23, 2008 1:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 













BtB on Facebook














