Pitching Mound Construction Leading to Higher Scoring at Texas? Update 2 stats up to date through 5/3/09
by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Apr 27, 2009 2:55 PM EDT
35 comments
Gil Meche, before his last start in Kansas City, was asked about his last start at Texas and here is his response:
"The reason I was stiff," Meche said, "is the mound (in Texas) was so flat. From the first pitch in warm-ups, I knew I was going to have to battle.
"With a flat mound, I don’t know if it’s the way my hips move or the way I stride out, but it affects something. That’s why I like steep mounds. I feel like I can generate more power instead of having my leg land too early and me having to generate power with my arm. That’s the only problem I had. That’s why I threw so many off-speed pitches."
This got me thinking about some work I did previously on individual park factors where I noted Rangers Ballpark in Arlington's official park factor was ~1.05, but it was predicted to be ~1.01. It has been stated that the stadium funnels the air to flow to center field was causing this discrepancy, but there seem to be another factor.
I decided to see if there was any truth to what Gil was talking about. For a initial look to see if there is anything to the accusation, I examined the average and maximum speeds of the opposing starting pitcher's four seem fastball that have pitched so far at Rangers Ballpark in Arlington in 2009. I limited the comparison games to those that happened as close possible to the start at Arlington, in case there was an injury to the pitcher. Also, I wanted to take the Texas pitcher's out of the study because they will be used to the supposedly smaller mound (I will look at Texas's pitchers as I get the time to see how they actually compare). There have been 9 pitchers so far that meet this criteria and here are their numbers:
| Game before Texas | Game at Texas | Game after Texas | Start before Texas | Start after Texas | ||||||||
| Date | Team | Starting Pitcher | Average Speed | Max Speed | Average Speed | Max Speed | Average Speed | Max Speed | Difference in Average Speed | Difference in Max Speed | Difference in Average Speed | Difference in Max Speed |
| Mon, Apr 6 | Cleveland | Lee | -- | -- | 89.74 | 91.6 | 90.65 | 92.5 | -- | -- | 0.91 | 0.9 |
| Wed, Apr 8 | Cleveland | F Carmona | -- | -- | 92.01 | 94.1 | 91.35 | 93.9 | -- | -- | -0.66 | -0.2 |
| Thu, Apr 9 | Cleveland | C Pavano | -- | -- | 87.73 | 89 | 90.34 | 93.2 | -- | -- | 2.61 | 4.2 |
| Mon, Apr 13 | Baltimore | K Uehara | 87.83 | 89.4 | 85.78 | 87.8 | 87.88 | 89.4 | 2.05 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| Tue, Apr 14 | Baltimore | A Simon | 92.97 | 95.3 | 89.93 | 91.8 | -- | -- | 3.04 | 3.5 | -- | -- |
| Wed, Apr 15 | Baltimore | M Hendrickson | 87.16 | 88.7 | 86.24 | 88.7 | 86.54 | 88.1 | 0.92 | 0 | 0.3 | -0.6 |
| Fri, Apr 17 | Kansas City | Meche | 91.32 | 94.6 | 89.79 | 92.4 | 91.96 | 94 | 1.53 | 2.2 | 2.17 | 1.6 |
| Sat, Apr 18 | Kansas City | Greinke | 92.93 | 95.6 | 92 | 94.7 | 94.17 | 97 | 0.93 | 0.9 | 2.17 | 2.3 |
| Sun, Apr 19 | Kansas City | Davies | 92.12 | 94.2 | 90.62 | 92.3 | 90.9 | 92.9 | 1.5 | 1.9 | 0.28 | 0.6 |
| Apr 28, 09 | Oakland | Anderson | ||||||||||
| Apr 30, 09 | Oakland | Braden | 86.85 | 87.1 | 86.42 | 87.1 | 0.43 | 0 | ||||
| May 1, 09 | Chicago WS | M Buehrle | 84.14 | 85.8 | 83.55 | 86.5 | 0.59 | -0.7 | ||||
| May 2, 09 | Chicago WS | J Contreras | 91.33 | 93.3 | 89.31 | 92 | 2.02 | 1.3 | ||||
| May 3, 09 | Chicago WS | Danks | 93.89 | 96 | 90.04 | 91.8 | 3.85 | 5.96 | ||||
| Average Values = | 90.05 | 92 | 88.62 | 90.68 | 90.45 | 92.64 | 1.69 | 1.67 | 1.28 | 1.36 |
Just using this small sample size, it can be seen that there seem to be a little truth to ability of pitchers to throw their fastest stuff at Texas. Fausto Carmona is the only pitcher that has thrown faster in a start before or after going Texas compared to the start at Texas. In the other 14 cases the pitcher through slower in Texas by ~1.5 mph.
These numbers have peaked my interest enough that I will continue to update the preceding data as the season continues, expanding it to the Texas pitchers and look back at 2007 and 2008 data with pitch F/X to see if the smaller mound is linked to higher than expected scoring at Rangers Ballpark in Arlington.
Update 1 2009 Texas Pitchers
I went ahead and averaged the Max and Average speeds for each pitcher home and away and here are results:
| Average Home Values | Average Away Values | Difference from Away minus Home | ||||
| Average Speed | Max Speed | Average Speed | Max Speed | Average Speed | Max Speed | |
| B McCarthy | 89.3 | 91.8 | 91.2 | 93.0 | 1.8 | 1.2 |
| K Benson | 87.3 | 89.3 | 88.5 | 90.3 | 1.2 | 1.0 |
| K Millwood | 90.3 | 92.9 | 90.9 | 93.7 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| M Harrison | 89.7 | 92.9 | 90.8 | 94.3 | 1.1 | 1.4 |
| S Feldman | 91.4 | 93.9 | 92.0 | 95.0 | 0.5 | 1.1 |
| V Padilla | 90.37 | 92.9 | 92.9 | 96.1 | 2.5 | 3.2 |
| 1.3 | 1.4 |
Next will be the 2008 numbers. I will keep the above information up to date every two or three days.
Update 2 (5/3/09) --- For every starting pitcher, home and away, for the last 2 series's (Oakland and Chicago), had thrown faster away from Arlington, then at Arlington. There is no Pitch F/X data for the April 28th game. I plan on soon getting the differences in release points documented.
5 recs |
35 comments
Email
Print
Comments
This is phenomenal.
I wonder if this hurts Texas pitchers overall, similar to a Coors Hangover Effect. They have to get used to something different about Texas, and then adjust on the road. (Well, they probably fail to adjust to a certain extent.) Plausible theory?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Apr 27, 2009 12:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I couldn't believe the numbers and wanted to run more, but knew I would have too much time this week.
Here is a link to an article published today at Baseball Time in Arlington where they discuss problems with Texas pitchers.
by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Apr 27, 2009 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did the mound advise the front office to trade Danks?
that would also explain a lot
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at Driveline Mechanics.
by devil_fingers on Apr 27, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
great post, by the way
even if I don’t fully grasp it yet
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at Driveline Mechanics.
by devil_fingers on Apr 27, 2009 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is fantastic
even if in the long run it turns out to be minimal, it’s a very interesting thought, and the data so far is damning.
Please follow up on this, and post a note over at Lonestar Ball to let us know to come on over and check it out when you update. Thanks.
Someone (paging Jamey Newberg, Mike Hindman and/or Evan Grant) needs to ask a couple of Ranger pitchers if they’ve noticed anything different about the mound.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Apr 27, 2009 1:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How much migh the max speed issue be a construct of the pitch f/x system being out of whack?
When Kalk did his adjustments, he probably just over-wrote any effects of the mound, then, right?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Apr 27, 2009 1:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Not for sure. Maybe Harry knows if there is anything on the differences in the systesms.
I will see if I can get any information from Kalk. I haven’t corresponded with him since he went to work for a team.
by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Apr 27, 2009 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very interesting stuff.
Can’t wait to read details on Ranger pitchers.
I wonder if this could potentially lead to pitching injuries…
by jwiscarson on Apr 27, 2009 3:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
There's nothing remotely conclusive about the mound.
Of the 40+ pitchers to toe the rubber in Arlington, only one of them has said anything about the mound. We don’t know that the mound has ANYTHING to do with these numbers. All we know is that there’s an early-season velocity difference.
by NoNameOnCard on Apr 27, 2009 4:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting stuff
Is it possible that the radar guns at TBIA due to position or other factors just read fewer mph than others?
by albyman32 on Apr 27, 2009 6:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Release Point tends to be different in Texas
For the 75 pitchers who threw at least 50 fastballs in Texas and in all other parks combined, the average release point was 1.3 inches higher in Arlington.
Not sure how valid this is (it may be noise or pitch f/x fluctuation). Many of the pitchers likely only had a single start in Texas.
If I bump it to 100, there’s only 26 pitchers, and the difference is +1 inches in Texas.
by Dan Turkenkopf on Apr 27, 2009 9:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Right, the big question is whether the mph and other measureables are real differences or oddities in the pitch f/x system.
Someone who’s really in touch with the pitch f/x methodology might be able to tell which it is, but maybe not.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Apr 27, 2009 9:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've seen weird results in Texas before
In my framing studies, the Texas catchers all seemed to do really well, which could be related to some strangeness in the setup there.
by Dan Turkenkopf on Apr 27, 2009 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Note from Evan Grant
I asked Grant (beat writer in Dallas) to talk to some of the Rangers and he was nice enough to do that:
Talked to five different Rangers pitchers today about Kansas City RHP Gil Meche’s comments about the mound in Arlington being "too flat," and thus leaving him sore after pitching. All five indicated no issue with the mound. GM Jon Daniels also checked with head groundskeeper Dennis Klein and the mound does conform to MLB specifications. I guess Meche was trying to explain some post-start soreness and not complaining about the mound, but it certainly sounded like he blamed something on the conditions. Here’s the thing, though: If the Rangers were to tinker with their mound at all, I’d expect it would be to create more slope, not less. That would give pitchers more leverage and aid in getting the ball to sink.
How tightly does MLB control the slope of the mound? Is that what Meche is talking about, exactly?
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Apr 27, 2009 9:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Right now I just want to continue to see what is going on, but could you have Grant get a picture of the mound at Texas for comparision
I have someone getting a picture of the Royal’s mound to compare it to. If anyone else knows of someone that can get a pic, that would be great.
by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Apr 28, 2009 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's rather surreal to see the GM of a team checking with the head groundskeeper because of a question asked of a beat writer by a blog reader.
That’s kind of cool, actually.
How surreal does it feel to have such influence, t ball?
by philkid3 on Apr 28, 2009 5:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is the difference between 1.01 and 1.05 that significant?
Seems small on the face of it.
Space.
It's a problem we face.
So we never go anywhere.
We just stay in one place.
by hazel on Apr 28, 2009 2:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
quite a bit actually
Let say 800 runs were to be scored there with a PF of 1.00
A PF of 1.01 is 8 extra runs scored
A PF of 1.05 is 40 extra runs scored.
It is a difference of 32 extra runs a year.
For a reference Colorado has a PF of 1.07, which is considered the best hitter friendly park
by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Apr 28, 2009 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well explained.
Where do you see COL with a 1.07 PF? I’m guessing that’s either using too small a sample size or has already averaged in COL’s visiting parks.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Apr 28, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This might be a dumb question, but...
What exactly does Meche mean by a flat mound? I’m having trouble wrapping my head around this. If all mounds are supposed to have a standard slab height (11"?) and a standard diameter (?), then how can one mound be flatter than another? I can understand subtle differences of maybe 1/4" or so of slope, but it seems to me the difference would have to be a lot more severe than that to be really noticeable. Now, looking at the numbers, it’s apparent something is going on, but who knows what that is? And besides,wouldn’t you think a franchise with a HOF fireballer for a president would stretch the limits on the rules for their home mound to give their pitchers as much advantage as possible? Very interesting stuff, but it all seems like it’s based on something that may or not be a figment of one pitchers imagination.
by vendor71 on Apr 28, 2009 12:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Addendum
OK, after reading through the comments I see that the release point in Arlington is 1-1.3" higher than normal. I suppose that would indicate a flatter mound, but wouldn’t that also make the mound larger in diameter than what is prescribed, thus making out of compliance with MLB rules? WTH?
Oh and by the way, he’s a really cantankerous HOF fireballer…I would think he would not be happy to learn about all this.
by vendor71 on Apr 28, 2009 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does anyone know
what the exact specifications of the mound are? I’ve searched the rule book but haven’t had any luck yet, too time consuming.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Apr 28, 2009 2:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Got this from Wikepedia, I check a couple other sites and they say the same thing. In word on getting a picture of the Texas mound?
In Major League Baseball, a regulation mound is 18 feet (5.5 m) in diameter, with the center 59 feet (18.0 m) from the rear point of home plate, on the line between home plate and second base. The front edge of the pitcher’s plate or rubber is 18 inches (45.7 cm) behind the center of the mound, making the front edge’s midpoint 60 feet 6 inches (18.4 m) from the rear point of home plate. Six inches (15.2 cm) in front of the pitcher’s rubber the mound begins to slope downward. The top of the rubber is to be no higher than ten inches (25.4 cm) above home plate. From 1903 through 1968, this height limit was set at 15 inches, but was often slightly higher, sometimes as high as 20 inches (50.8 cm), especially for teams that emphasized pitching, such as the Los Angeles Dodgers, who were reputed to have the highest mound in the majors.
by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Apr 28, 2009 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is there anything that describes how steep the slope should be?
Theoretically it could be a really gradual slope – 10 inches over the max 10 feet from where the slope starts to the mound ends (I think I calculated that right in my head).
Or it could be a sharper slope, 10 inches over say 6 or 7 feet, and then flat from there.
I suppose it’s even possible that a different slope could affect a pitcher’s landing area. How that affects the pitcher, I have no idea.
by Dan Turkenkopf on Apr 28, 2009 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder if a slight difference in slope
is what Meche noticed, or if there was just something peculiar about the mound that one day right where he lands in his delivery.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
by t ball on Apr 28, 2009 6:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Considering you found that the release point is higher ....
… it seems that the foot is being planted at a higher elevation, therefor less velocity. There isn’t any that says how the slope is to be. It could be like an upside down U vice an upside down V. I might have to go and buy the Meche Game and see where his foot lands vice the other pitchers and where pitch F/X picks up the release point.
by Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal) on Apr 28, 2009 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just to clarify...
Who knows if Meche is BSing or not. But his theory is that the mound plateaus more than usual over the majority of the mound, then slopes more extremely near the outside to the ground. This would result in the plant foot being higher than usual, and not letting the pitcher use gravity to carry his weight down and therefore partially forward. There would be less momentum from him, and therefore less speed on the ball. The initial trajectory of the pitch would also matter, as the more straight forward the pitcher can release the ball, the more horizontal speed the pitch would have, which is a lot of what matters.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Apr 28, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then again Meche left yesterdays game I do believe
against Tor with lower back tightness.
That might be just as indicative as anything with the mound.
I do find it strange that there is a market velocity difference, but that might also be a byproduct of the system setup instead of a mound issue.
Interesting point to map longterm though
by laxtonto on Apr 29, 2009 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wowza
This very surpising. Great Work
There are three things in my life which I really love: God, my family, and baseball. The only problem - once baseball season starts, I change the order around a bit. ~Al Gallagher, 1971
by wizardofozzie on May 1, 2009 2:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanShots on Beyond the Box Score
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
BtB on Facebook
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
