Pitch and Hit F/X Brainstorming Thread

by Sky Kalkman on Jun 22, 2009 1:00 PM EDT

Harry and I were talking a couple weeks ago -- right after his pitch f/x chat, actually -- and one thing we agreed was a great help to furthering analysis, especially new lines of analysis, was group discussion. When a bunch of people start brainstorming and taking tangents off of others' ideas, great things can happen. With that in mind, here's an open thread for brainstorming where we can take pitch f/x and hit f/x analysis.

Before those of you who would never do your own analysis tune out, stop. One of the most helpful points of view is from folks who don't understand the ins and outs of the data. Why? You don't know what the limitations are and might come up with something nobody's thought of or something that would take a little creativity to figure out.

Here are some lines of thinking to get this brainstorming going.

New metrics. Harry's done things like line drive to swinging strike ratio for certain pitches. Maybe you'd like to see something that measures control (percentage of pitches within three inches of strike zone border?)
What are some ways to tackle pitch selection and sequencing? Simply what percentage of each pitch a pitcher will throw after a given pitch? Work count into it somehow?
Are there better ways to use graphs?
Can we not use graphs?
How do we use more pitch f/x from the hitters' point of view. What pitches does he like? Can we pick out "guess hitters"? Are there combinations of pitches he doesn't handle well? Can we detect platoon effects beyond L/R and GB/FB?
Other?

You don't have to throw out complete ideas -- the whole point is that if you throw out partial ideas, either incomplete or vague, someone else can take over where you left off

Tweet Comment 16 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I would like a page(s) that would be a basic one stop primer on Pitch/Hit F/X

If there is new information, it could just be added. It seems that some people are just scared of it or don’t know it and a nice 10 to 20 minute primer would be nice.

Jeff Zimmerman - Protecting the world from RBI's and Wins from my mom's guest house.

by Jeff Zimmerman on Jun 22, 2009 1:25 PM EDT reply actions

Something like a Pitch/Hit FX Wiki?

I like it. It’d certainly be a help to someone like me.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Jun 22, 2009 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions

Ideas

Quality of Contact – I was thinking of something along the lines of the difference between pitch velocity and hit velocity but don’t think it would find what I am after. I am curious if certain pitches (cutters, sinkers) or pitchers are more apt at inducing weak contact. I figure it would correlate with other outcome based stats but might add something more to the run value/contact%/swingstrike% story. What pitch results in the most homeruns?

Pitch Identification – Is it easy to identify “hanging” breaking balls? Could we find a hanger leaderboard. Do they typically get hammered?

I would also like a primer and repository for anything F/X containing links to sites regularly posting F/X articles in addition to articles from other sites with occasional/one F/X article(s).

by JBrew on Jun 22, 2009 1:45 PM EDT reply actions

Quality of Contact

I like this idea —

Looking at some type of delta between the Pitch F/X speed, and the speed of the ball off the bat. Generally starting with a ratio of Hit F/X Velo / Pitch F/X Velo and modifying from there?

Then you could possibly compare a given pitcher’s average “Batter Effect” to the league average “Batter Effect” to see if a particular pitcher results in generally slower/softer hit balls than average.

by Trickman on Jun 22, 2009 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions

Just came here to post this same idea.

Royals fan here, it seems like Greinke gives up a ton of bloop hits. Or it seems like he has THIS year at least. Could hit f/x show this information and compare it across comps or the league overall. Even see if certain pitches are more vulnerable to these types of hits.

Just thoughts.

If you were thinking, you wouldn't have thought that.

by Warden11 on Jun 24, 2009 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions

I agree with Pitch Idenfication

St. Louis relievers... defying win expectancy since 2008
http://www.drivelinemechanics.com/

by vivaelpujols on Jun 22, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions

What I'm really hoping Hit F/X is going to innovate

Is defense. Defensive metrics are dandy, but they still seem more than a bit rough around the edges. Hitter’s BABIP seems to be enough to demonstrate the degree of control hitters have on balls off the bat, namely very little, they control their swing, a bit of how well they make contact, and vaguely which direction the ball will go in, but little else about the balls specific trajectory. So breaking balls in play down into few categories seems at least acceptable there as a measuring stick.

But I’ve always been curious about pitchers BABIP, how it relates to defense, and stats like BP’s Team Defensive Efficiency. Are there hit trajectories that simply weren’t defensed properly? Did a manager position his fielders in a different way than other managers do, allowing a particular ball to be caught/hit? Seems like Hit F/X could really quantify this line of thinking in an exponentially more refined manner, and give managers and coaches a tool that they never had before.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Jun 22, 2009 1:54 PM EDT reply actions

Speaking of defense

I’ve wondered about whether it’d be possible to use Pitch/Hit f/x data to determine the effectiveness of a catcher’s game calling. I know it’d be a bit tough considering that the bench may call pitches or that catchers may call for a pitch in a general area rather than a specific target but a rough guide might be able to illuminate it better than CERA.

by YankeeGoose on Jun 23, 2009 5:03 AM EDT up reply actions

One thought that I've repeatedly had with Hit F/X is just how long it's going to take to generate usable run value data.

Offensively, given the understanding that batters don’t have great control over their batted balls, launch velocity, vertical angle, and field quadrant may be enough to field some values.

Defensively, even with some grouping (and determining groups will be in itself another hefty undertaking), gathering enough similar batted balls to use for a defense metric may take a while. With so much space in the outfield, would a full season of Hit F/X be enough to start finding building such a metric?

by abender20 on Jun 22, 2009 2:58 PM EDT reply actions

That makes sense

But I’m thinking something on a bit of a different scale, like Defensive Positioning efficiency or something along those lines. Comparing where players are positioned based on a combination of defensive success rate and Hit F/X tendencies for hitters. To really get it right, you’d probably also have to include a range rating for each fielder. At the very least, it seems like a season’s worth of data would yield something you can experiment with, but I may be misjudging the scale of such an enterprise.

Or maybe, to refine range ratings, you could do something with sort of “roving” ranges based on fielder positioning and Hit F/X tendencies. A big lefty pull hitter is going to have the infield swung around to the right. Does that technically increase the third baseman or shortstop’s zone to their left? Is the fact that fewer balls are put into that zone, especially to the extreme left of that zone, properly accounted for in range ratings? I really don’t know, I don’t know enough about the specific metrics, but it seems like Hit F/X could help get more precise with such measurements.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Jun 22, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions

This doesn’t have to do with evaluating players, but I’d always liked to have seen an umpires database using pitch f/x to see the differences from ump to ump and what each ump’s “zone” is. Like, maybe Ump A has a more horizontal zone and Ump B has one that’s more vertical, etc etc. Maybe this has been done and i"ve just missed it. I know Bucco Blog did some ump research into which pitchers were getting squeezed, but I’d like to see something more visual.

by Mike Rogers on Jun 23, 2009 1:17 AM EDT reply actions

I was about to post something similar.

This could show an umpire’s consistency as well, and maybe assign some sort of grades for consistency and how close each ump’s zone resembles what the actual zone is supposed to be.

I would also like to see if certain pitchers are given more of a benefit of the doubt for throwing strikes. For instance, if someone like Grag Maddux is more likely to get a borderline strike than someone with control/command issues.

by nolesblogger on Jun 23, 2009 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions

Jeff (TucsonRoyal) mused on this very topic

At this Linky Link

by JBrew on Jun 23, 2009 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions

I’d like to see linear weights applied to types of batted balls using Hit f/x; ie, a ball launched at +4 degrees and sprayed at -10 degrees at 76 mph is worth -0.15 runs and a ball launched at +17 degrees and sprayed at -40 degrees at 96 mph is worth 0.55 runs, etc. That could be used to create a hitting stat that is entirely process based as opposed to outcome based. I imagine a much larger sample is needed for this.

by 17843 on Jun 24, 2009 2:04 PM EDT reply actions