Understanding Pitch f/x Graphs: Location vs. Movement
I'm a smart guy. I have a bachelors degree, can dominate Excel, and destroy my family in puzzle games on a regular basis. But when Pitch f/x analysis first came out, I didn't get it. From talking to friends and reading comments by readers, I'm apparently not the only one.
One problem is that the graphs can be ambiguous and vague, requiring some additional knowledge be brought to the party. But once you have that additional knowledge, they aren't as daunting. Let's start by understanding two popular graphs, one that shows pitch location and one that shows pitch movement.
Pitch Location
Looking at Ryan Perry's last outing, each dot, whether it's a square or diamond, marks where the ball is located as it crosses the front of home plate, and we're looking from the catcher's point of view. (Maybe it would be nice if these pitch f/x gurus would watermark an image of a pitcher throwing right at us?) The x-axis represents horizontal location and the y-axis represents vertical location, just as you probably assumed. The units presented here are feet, although inches are often used.
This graph doesn't care about how a pitch ended up at each location, just that it did -- if a Randy Johnson fastball and a Barry Zito curve cross the plate at the same spot, they get marked with the same location. Different analysts will show different strike zones but a common approach is to show a 24-inch wide zone, which best matches what is actually being called.
So that's the "what", but how about the "why"? I mean, if these graphs are being used for analysis purposes, what might we gain from a location graph? Well, you can see where a pitcher prefers to work. Even more helpful might be location broken down by batter handedness (for Tom Glavine you'd see everything's outside) and/or by pitch type (sliders away and cutters inside). You could look at location across starts to see if a pitcher changed their approach or to explain why they got rocked one day and not the other. Or maybe only look at locations of pitches hit for homeruns.
Pitch Movement
In a movement graph, we don't care about where a pitch actually ended up, but instead care about how it got there. Our point of view is again from the catcher's eyes and the axes are again horizontal and vertical, but this time they represent change in location due to spin, not absolute location. Change in location compares a pitch's actual final location at the front of the plate to where physics equations would have expected it to end up given no spin at all (and no knuckling effects).
For example, most pitches, with curveballs being the main exception, have some backspin, which causes them not to drop as much as a spinless pitch. Anything above the middle of the graph has some backspin. Curveballs have topspin, causing them to drop more than a spinless pitch, and they'll be below the middle of the graph. Most fastballs have some sidespin in addition to backspin, which causes them to break horizontally -- righties' fastballs tail into right-handed hitters, so those pitches would appear on the left side of the graph. Sliders have some sidespin, too, but in the opposite direction as fastballs and would usually appear on the right of the graph if thrown by righties, because they move towards a left-handed batter.
What movement graphs do not take into account is pitch speed. Imagine two pitches without any spin, one thrown 50 mph and one thrown 100 mph. Which one will drop more? The first one, obviously, but all of that drop is caused by gravity, and none by spin. Both pitches would register in the exact middle of a movement graph, because they end up exactly where you'd expect -- there's no spin to change their trajectory. I'm not saying we don't care about speed or movement caused by speed (we do), I'm just saying that it's not a consideration on these graphs.
Ok, so how are these movement graphs useful for analysis? Well, you'll find a lot of clustering of data points, which shows how each pitch tends to move for a pitcher. You can compare the movement on one pitcher's slider to another's. You could also compare the movement on a fastball to movement on a slider across a lot of pitchers, looking for ideal differences. You could try to identify how sinkers compare to cutters compare to rising fastballs. You could look at how consistent a pitcher is with movement (hanging curves), although perhaps consistency isn't what a pitcher is going for, like with Mariano Rivera's cutter.
Does that help? Anything I can clear up? Is there a different type of common pitch f/x graph that you think could use some explanation?
2 recs |
21 comments
|
Comments
This is awesome. I’ve been looking for something just like this to clear up a few questions I had. Thanks.
You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the goddamn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all.
by Smoltz's Beard on Apr 17, 2009 12:32 PM EDT reply actions
This is really lame question, but
What is the easiest way to create the strike zone box. I use OpenOffice, but if I get the Excel method, I can usually find the OO method.
by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Apr 17, 2009 12:35 PM EDT reply actions
same here, good question!
"If Bowden was a general contractor, he'd build houses with nine bedrooms, six garages, no bathrooms, and half a roof."
by DyeLongJustice on Apr 17, 2009 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
the only think i can find is the strike zone top and bottom data, and i guess if you throw in the plate width you can get the K zone
but i don’t know how to get that onto my graph without messing things up or typing in a bunch of points to string together.
"If Bowden was a general contractor, he'd build houses with nine bedrooms, six garages, no bathrooms, and half a roof."
by DyeLongJustice on Apr 17, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I have to create the graphs with lines for the zone and then go back and make the lines for the pitch points invisible
Must be better way
by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Apr 17, 2009 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I just take a screen shot of the graph, go into an image editor, and add the zone myself
Once again, must be a better way
-Zach Sanders
MLB Notebook.com
Roto Rat.com
It's pretty easy to make a data set that is 4 points where those 4 points are
the points of the corners of the strike zone.
That’s what I did in my post on Suppan – just make a 4 point data set -
-1 1.5, 1 1.5, 1 3.5, -1 3.5
although that may be incorrect it’s the right idea
---
Juuuust a bit outside!!
http://www.rightfieldbleachers.com
Pitch Location chart
If you were able to get an image in the background for the pitch movement chart, why not find something like a screenshot of your basic at-bat from MLB 09: The Show and use that to help establish the catcher’s perspective?
I agree. A quick google search showed some possibilities.
I think I’d ideally like to see something like the NBA/MLB logo; a simple shape that looks like a pitcher following through.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Lefty or righty?
Over-the-top, 3/4, sidearm, submarine?
Long follow through, or short follow through?
Sounds like a lot of options.
Thank you
I appreciate the explanation.
I do have one question to go along with all this. For any particular pitch, is there a range of movement that is generally recognized as “good” for that pitch classification? I am terrible at judging “stuff” simply by watching a pitch, but it would be nice to look at some of these charts and intuitively see that a particular pitch had a “nasty slider” tonight, etc.
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Apr 17, 2009 2:08 PM EDT reply actions
I don't know, either.
I keep pushing these pitch f/x gurus to give a walk through of pitches, showing league-average speed and movement, along with some examples of really good pitchers, really extreme pitchers, and really borderline MLB pitchers.
To me, it’s comparing pitchers to each other and to common baselines that makes this stuff useable, because then there’s actually some context involved.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
I think that's the biggest gap today between pitch f/x analysis
and other analysis (wOBA, win values, uzr, etc.). 5 inches of break is absolutely meaningless to me in the context of a slider. I also question whether all 5 inches are created the same. Riviera’s cutter is notorious for late movement. If a pitch moves 5 inches over 20 feet compared to 5 inches over 60 feet that’s an incredible difference.
Also, the relationship between movement and velocity needs to be addressed. Like you mentioned a 50mph pitch versus a 100mph pitch are going to be different. So if one pitch moves 5 inches but travels at 87mph is it better or worse than one that moves 5 inches but 93mph?
I don’t intend to sound demeaning because there’s a great deal of effort that’s been put into these graphs but I feel like there’s a growing fascination with the visual representation even though we don’t really know what, if anything, it’s telling us.
I agree to a certain extent with the frustration.
My feeling is that the current graphs and visualizations are phase one. Nobody’s done this before people are just throwing stuff together.
The next phase includes stuff like Harry’s slices to try to measure command, Tango’s idea of what is the pitch doing .15 (or whatever) seconds from home plate, Dave Allen’s and Slyde’s work on Ted Williams style heat maps, etc, etc.
There will be a next phase, once we use the information from the first two phases to figure out what the heck we care about.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by 





























