River Avenue Blues

River Ave. Blues » Archives for Derek Albin » Page 5

James Paxton’s command and the effect of his batterymates

by

(Stephen Brashear/Getty)

Anytime a player is traded to a new team, new experiences await. Whether it’s a new home, new city, new mound, new teammates…the list goes on. James Paxton was traded to the Yankees in November, so he’s had ample time to get his living arrangements in order. What he hasn’t had a chance to do is build a rapport with his new batterymates, Gary Sanchez and Austin Romine. Fortunately, spring training will be an opportunity to do so.

Being familiar with one another is important in the pitcher-catcher relationship, but there are certain traits that are unique to both positions. In particular, the catcher can’t aim a pitcher’s offering, and the pitcher doesn’t have the ability to frame a pitch. Paxton comes to the Yankees presumably as the same pitcher he was with the Mariners, but he won’t be pitching to the same catcher anymore. How do the Yankees’ catchers, Sanchez in particular, since he should get the bulk of Paxton’s innings, stack up against the southpaw’s former partner?

Tale of the tape: Zunino vs. Sanchez

Paxton will no longer pitch to one of baseball’s best defensive catchers, Mike Zunino. The bat never came around like Seattle hoped, but Zunino was an elite receiver from day one. He’s had some monster framing years, most notably 2014, when he racked up 22 framing runs. His framing stats have declined in recent years, but as Jeff Sullivan wrote, part of this is due to the rest of the league catching on to framing.

Sanchez, who will be Paxton’s new main partner, receives plenty of hate for his defense. Passed balls are the reason for the disdain, but that doesn’t make him a bad receiver. There’s no question that he needs to improve his blocking, but he helps the defense in other ways, including throwing and pitch framing. The Yankees have bought into framing for over a decade, and Sanchez is yet another backstop who shines with his presentation.

Metric (2018) Sanchez Zunino
CSAA 0.005 0.008
CSAA Standard Deviation +/- 0.002 +/- 0.002
Framing Runs/7000 opportunities 4.9 8.4
Framing Runs/7000 opportunities Standard Deviation +/- 2.2 +/- 1.9
Called Strike% on Edge Pitches 50.02% 50.75%
Team Avg. FB Velocity 93.8 90.8
Team Avg. FB Spin 2331 2174
Team Avg. Breaking Spin 2532 2335

Zunino has an edge on Sanchez in Called Strikes Above Average (CSAA) and Framing Runs, though there is some uncertainty about this. Both catchers are within each other’s error bars, meaning that Sanchez could be just as good or better than Zunino. He could still be worse! But ultimately, there really isn’t a big difference between the two. They’re both good framers.

A big difference between the two are the pitching staffs they handle. Stylistically, the Yankees and Mariners are polar opposites. The Yankees ranked first, first, and second in team fastball velocity, fastball spin rate, and breaking ball spin rate, respectively. Seattle placed last, second to last, and fifth-worst, respectively, in those same categories. Simply put: Sanchez has a much tougher group to handle.

Although Zunino had an easier staff to catch, be aware that CSAA adjusts for the pitcher, among other things. It judges Zunino and Sanchez independent of who is on the mound. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t take the two different styles into consideration. Rather, perhaps it lends credence to the potential of Sanchez being in the positive range of his standard deviation while Zunino is in the negative range.

I’d be remiss without mentioning Romine here. He’s within the same range of certainty as Sanchez and Zunino, meaning that Paxton is also in good hands with him. Ideally, it won’t be more than a handful of starts that Romine needs to catch, but it’s reassuring to have a backup of Romine’s defensive caliber.

Catchers aside, what does Paxton bring to the table?

Paxton has excellent control

Pitchers who work quickly and fill up the strike zone are a manager’s dream. Paxton is just that. He challenges hitters with his fastball-heavy approach, knowing full well that they can’t catch up to him. Take a look:

Based on the above heatmap, it’s no surprise that Paxton had the fifth-highest called strike probability (CS Prob) of all starters last year. That’s the likelihood of any given pitch being a called strike, based on probabilities that are assigned to certain areas within and outside the strike zone. It’s best explained here, although the following diagram from that article is a great illustration as well:

(Baseball Prospectus)

Those rounded squares are different bands of called strike probability, with all pitches in the innermost area called a strike 90 percent of the time and all pitches in the outermost area called a strike 10 percent of the time. Keep in mind that these are not hard and fast lines of demarcation; the likelihood of a called strike gradually decreases as the area expands. Paxton lives in the 90 percent band, hence his high CS Prob.

Paxton doesn’t have great command

We’ve established that Paxton throws lots of strikes, but the quality of strikes is a different story. Getting strikes on pitches in the aforementioned 90 percent band isn’t challenging, but being able to locate pitches on the corners consistently is another thing.

CSAA, when used for pitchers, is a good proxy for command. Because CSProb assigns the likelihood of strike calls, CSAA can take this a step further by assessing the frequency of getting strikes at varying ranges of probability, controlled for things like the count, catcher, umpire, and hitter. Able to nab a bunch of strikes in a low probability area? Good command. Lose strikes in a higher probability area? Not so much. Anecdotally, a lot of pitchers lose strikes when they miss the target, forcing the catcher to make awkward movements. So how did Paxton do? He had the worst CSAA in baseball last season, at -3.38 percent.

I’m not so sure it’s fair to say that this means Paxton has the worst command in baseball, because after all, he just might not be trying to paint the corners. It’s not like he needs to. Plus, although he’s always been below average per CSAA, he’s been pretty consistent at throwing to the edge of the zone.

Year Edge% CSAA CSProb
2013 45.10% -0.88 48.80%
2014 47.90% -1.02 45.30%
2015 45.10% -0.76 47.50%
2016 49.20% -1.33 50.40%
2017 46.60% -1.98 50.00%
2018 46.40% -3.38 53.00%

For whatever reason, Paxton got absolutely hosed on borderline fastballs compared to the rest of the league. You would think fastballs are the easiest pitches for umpires to judge since they are the straightest offering.

% of Edge Pitches Called Strikes
Pitch Paxton MLB
Fastball (4-Seam) 41.4% (379 pitches) 47.40%
Cutter 31.4% (35 pitches) 47.60%
Curveball 46.9% (96 pitches) 48.60%

So Paxton had virtually the same edge percentage in 2017 as he did in 2018, yet his CSAA tanked. Umpires didn’t give him the benefit of the doubt on fastballs near the corners. Bizarre.

Is Zunino to blame?

What makes Paxton’s poor CSAA surprising at first is that he’s thrown to a great framer for his entire career. How could he struggle to get the extra calls on the edges while throwing to a catcher that excels in that department? The key thing to understand is that Zunino is not the culprit. Pitcher CSAA level sets with who’s catching, hitting, and umpiring. The whole point of the stat is to try to isolate the pitcher’s contribution, all else being equal. So if this is on Paxton, why is it happening?

I looked at Paxton’s heatmap for edge pitches against the Mariners’ heat map for called strikes on the edge. Ideally, I would have compared Paxton to the entire league, but I could only generate the heat maps by team. For what it’s worth: all teams are pretty similar to the Mariners in this regard. Plenty of borderline low strikes called, but few at the top of the zone. The problem for Paxton? He throws a lot of high heaters. Now we’re getting somewhere (click image for large view).

Left: All of Paxton’s edge pitches. Right: All of Seattle’s edge pitches called for strikes.

I don’t want to overwhelm you with heatmaps, but there are a few other important ones to note that emphasize my point about Paxton’s high fastballs. Here is where he locates his fastball on the edges, here are his strike calls on the edges (on all pitch types), and here are the balls on the edges (on all pitch types). Keep in mind, Paxton throws his fastball around 65 percent of the time. So those strike calls you at the bottom of the edge? Those are rare.

Paxton works upstairs quite a bit with fastball, and those simply don’t get called strikes very often. CSAA doesn’t penalize Paxton too harshly for each pitch in that region, since it’s a low-probability strike. However, because he predominantly hits the upper edges, the penalty adds up. Add that to the lack of pitches thrown in the lower-right quadrant of the edge, where most extra strikes are picked up, doesn’t help Paxton either.

Why Sanchez and Paxton might pair better

Here’s what we know: Paxton throws a good portion of his edge pitches at the top of the zone, but umpires are disinclined to call high strikes.  Even the best framers aren’t going to steal strikes up in the zone (click image for larger view):

Those are the locations where Zunino, Sanchez, and Romine received strikes on the black last season. All of them do well at the bottom of the box, to no surprise. The most noticeable difference is that Sanchez (and Romine, to a degree) do a tad better than Zunino as pitches elevate.

What gives me some hope, not that we need any for Paxton (he’s really good), is that he might get a few extra strikes at the top with Sanchez and Romine. However, we might not see this reflected in his CSAA, because it adjusts for who’s catching. Where we could see the impact is the percentage of fastballs called for strikes on the edge, which is a raw and unadjusted amount.

Zunino might be a better framer than anyone the Yankees have, but he also might not be the right match for a pitcher like Paxton. All positive framing catchers are going to do well stealing strikes down because it jibes with today’s umpiring. Zunino appears to build most of his framing value on low offerings. Sanchez and Romine do well there as well, but it’s not as concentrated as Zunino. Sanchez perhaps meshes best in terms of presenting Paxton’s high fastball. With guys like Chad Green and Aroldis Chapman on the roster, maybe it’s not a surprise that Sanchez has held his own on higher pitches. Those two have power fastballs and like to elevate them, similar to Paxton.

Chances are that Paxton’s transition to Sanchez and Romine will be a lateral one. The Yankees catchers are practically in a dead heat with Zunino when it comes to the advanced metrics. Any downside seems unlikely, as Sanchez and Romine would have to decline suddenly. Fortunately, there is no indication of that occurring anytime soon. The best case scenario is that Paxton will get high strikes more often in pinstripes. The adjusted metrics might not change, but the raw results could improve.

Considering positioning as a factor in Andujar’s defense

by

(Presswire)

A couple weeks ago, Mike wrote about the Yankees doubling down on Miguel Andujar’s defense. The key takeaway was that Andujar’s struggles aren’t for a lack of effort. His work ethic is virtually unparalleled, though at some point, the results need to follow. The biggest issue with Miggy’s defense has been his range, something Mike also addressed last summer.

Good range requires quick reaction time and lateral quickness. Generally speaking, I think a player’s reflexes are innate and probably next to impossible to improve. Lateral quickness is something that can be improved via training. Perhaps we see a more nimble Andujar this year, but I’m skeptical that his reaction improves. There is one way to compensate for a slow first step, however: better positioning. That’s why I found the following quote Mike used in his most recent piece worth discussing:

“What we’re focusing on right now is his pre-pitch setup,” [Infield coach Carlos] Mendoza added. “We’re trying to put him in the best position so he can react at contact. Making sure that he finds a spot where he’s comfortable on his setup so he can have a better first step, a better read on the ball to create better angles. It starts with his setup and his ready position.”

Getting Andujar into a comfortable stance in order to make a quick first movement is important, but what about moving Andujar a few steps back? Would he be more comfortable standing a few feet further away from the infield grass, thereby giving him more time to get to wide grounders? It seems pretty logical. Of course, it could also be too good to be true.

One of the nice things Statcast shares is defensive positioning data, which tells us how far away players stand from the plate prior to each pitch. Using this information, I figured we could see how Andujar’s counterparts position themselves, while also looking to see if their depth has an effect on their performance.

By the Numbers

Statcast tells us that the typical third baseman was positioned 113 feet away from home plate last year. Andujar was a foot closer to the grass, checking in at 112. Others ranged as far as 118 feet away (Alex Bregman and Matt Chapman) to only 107 feet deep (Johan Camargo). To try to assign some meaning to this, I wanted to compare the depth to player’s range and arm strength. My theory was that players who play deeper have better range, stronger arms, and slower first steps than those who play shallower.

For range, I used Range Runs (RngR), which is a component of UZR. Admittedly, UZR is far from imperfect but it’s just about the best information available in this instance. Of 31 third baseman who played at least 500 innings at the hot corner last year, there was no correlation between RngR and depth. Bummer.

Arm strength and first step is something that Statcast can measure, but unfortunately, it’s not publicly available. The next best thing I could find was the FANS scouting report, which was most recently done at the end of the 2017 season on Fangraphs. It’s not what I’d want to look at ideally, but the wisdom of the crowds is worth something. There are grades for arm strength, range, and many other tools for years 2017 and prior. In this instance, arm strength and range are all we need. Once again, though, no correlation. Before the charts, one thing to note that this sample is limited to 21 third baggers. First, arm strength:

Finally, first step:

What all this says to me is that positioning is a matter of personal comfort. There are times when a scouting report will affect a third baseman’s location on the diamond, such as bunt situations or against pull-happy lefties. Ultimately, positioning isn’t a one-size fit all solution.

What the best third baseman do

Tricks of the trade can be learned from peers, and there are plenty of good third basemen in the league right now. Below, a table of third baseman who had both positive DRS and UZR marks in 2018:

Name Depth (ft.) DRS UZR RngR First Step Arm
Matt Chapman 118 29 10.9 10 77 75
Travis Shaw 117 9 2.2 3.9 45 45
Nolan Arenado 116 5 5.8 1.4 78 79
Eduardo Escobar 115 5 1.5 -2.3 44 52
Yolmer Sanchez 114 5 3.6 4 52 64
Jose Ramirez 114 3 3.3 1.6 62 67
Mike Moustakas 114 2 1 -1.8 71 38
Adrian Beltre 111 10 2.1 1.4 72 67
Todd Frazier 110 2 2.4 1.1 52 47
Jedd Gyorko 109 6 1.3 1.5 41 53
Johan Camargo 107 7 5.5 5.7 71 53

There’s a wide range of defensive positioning, again illustrating the fact that its more of a preference than anything else. To no one’s surprise, Chapman sits at the top with some outlandishly great numbers all around. He just so happens to play far back. On the other side of the coin, there’s Beltre. He’s one of the best fielders to ever play the position, yet he’s much closer than Chapman. Out of curiosity to see if he moved in as he got older, I went back to 2016 (the earliest available), but Beltre hasn’t moved. Again, this points to depth being whatever each player favors.

Why Andujar should try playing deeper

Even though a few defensive metrics don’t correlate well with depth, that doesn’t mean Andujar would be wasting his time by trying something different. After all, if Chapman plays 118 feet back, why shouldn’t Andujar give it a shot? Miggy has a pretty fantastic arm himself, so it’s not a matter of arm strength that prevents Andujar from trying it. If he’s comfortable playing deep and has some positive results to show for it, great. If not, he can always revert to his old location. This is the perfect experiment to conduct during spring training.

I don’t want this idea to come off as some sort of panacea. I’ve already noted that there isn’t a correlation between depth and a few stats, but what I haven’t gotten into are certain factors specific to Andujar that need to be considered. For one, Andujar has a bad habit of double clutching before throwing. This is already an issue that could be exacerbated by playing deeper, which gives the runner extra time. On the other hand, Andujar has a rocket for an arm. With his arm strength, I don’t think a longer throw would be an issue. It’s just a matter of correcting the double clutch, which ostensibly is teachable. Although this idea was born because of Andujar’s lack of range, I wouldn’t have proposed it if he didn’t have the arm for it.

What’s next

Spring training is right around the corner and I’m curious to see if there are any noticeable differences for Andujar. We’ve heard about how much work he’s put in this offseason, and given the apparent lack of desire to sign Manny Machado, Andujar’s fielding is going to be heavily scrutinized. The unfortunate thing is that it’s so difficult to notice changes, particularly when watching on TV. There’s no view of pre-pitch positioning or a shot of a fielder’s first step. It might not be until partway through the regular season, when some of the returns for various metrics come in, that we can get an idea of any changes or improvements made, if any.

As Mike noted a couple weeks back, it’s fantastic that Andujar has the drive to get better. I’d much rather have that than a terrible defender who doesn’t care. Still, results need to come at some point, otherwise he’s going to be untenable at the position. Moving him off of third is always an option, but his bat wouldn’t be as valuable elsewhere. The Yankees know this, and will exhaust every last option before conceding. If no stone is going unturned, perhaps moving Andujar back a few feet is worth a shot.

Scouting the Free Agent Market: Rotation Depth

by

The following is the first post from our newest writer, Derek Albin. He currently contributes to Baseball Prospectus and has also written about the Yankees at the now defunct BP Bronx and It’s About The Money, Stupid. You’ll see his work regularly. You can follow Derek on Twitter at @derekalbin.

How many more Cessa starts do we have to watch? (Getty Images)

Conventional wisdom can be trite, but sometimes it exists for good reason. The old adage that you can never have enough starting pitching is something said ad nauseam, but holds true. Just look at the Yankees last year: twelve different pitchers started and ten of them did so on multiple occasions. This season, we can probably expect something similar.

Right now, the Yankees have baseball’s third-best projected rotation per Fangraphs. It’s pretty hard to knock a staff of that caliber, but if there’s any flaw, it’s depth. In particular, Luis Cessa, Chance Adams, Albert Abreu, and Domingo Acevedo project for 83 innings altogether. Decreasing that group’s workload would be ideal, and it looks like something the front office is considering. Even with pitchers and catchers reporting in just a few weeks, there are still some useful pitchers available in free agency.

Wade Miley

Like CC Sabathia, Miley appears to have saved his career thanks to an emphasis on the cutter. In the past, Miley had thrown four-seamers for more than half of his pitches. Last year, he started throwing his cutter more than 40 percent of the time to resounding success. His home run problems? Gone. He allowed just three long balls in over 80 innings. All told, Miley posted a career best 2.57 ERA, supported by a solid 3.59 FIP.

Steamer foresees some regression, projecting a 4.36 ERA this year. Still, sign me up for that as a depth starter. Of course, why would Miley take on such a role? Given his revitalization and history of durability (29 starts or more annually from 2012 through 2017), he should be able to find a regular gig somewhere. Barring a six-man rotation, which is unlikely given the amount of off-days to begin the regular season, Miley would be in the bullpen to begin the year. Sure, someone could get hurt during camp, but that’s not something Miley will want to count on. Miley would be a nice-to-have option, but it seems like an unlikely union. Then again, free agency is a weird, weird place nowadays.

Brett Anderson

It’s been over a decade now since Anderson was one of the top prospects in all of baseball. Injuries have held the southpaw back, but he has put together a few decent stretches at points throughout his career. Though he’s never been a strikeout artist, he’s consistently put together solid peripherals by throwing strikes without surrendering many homers. In a curtailed 2018 due to injury (shocking), he pitched to a 4.48 ERA and 4.17 FIP in just over 80 frames.

Steamer expects more of the same: a low four ERA with some time on the shelf. His ability is tantalizing because he has the makings of a stellar fourth starter, but he simply struggles to stay on the field. For that reason, he might be hard pressed to find a guaranteed spot in anyone’s rotation. Should that be the case, the Yankees are a great fit. I’m sure that the front office would prefer a more durable fallback option, but from a talent perspective, Anderson is hard to top for this role.

Jeremy Hellickson

Like Miley and Anderson, Hellickson also spent time on the disabled list last year. When on the mound, though, the righty pitched well for Washington. He posted a 3.45 ERA and 4.22 FIP in a hair over 90 innings, which was a strong recovery from a horrendous 2017. In time split with Philadelphia and Baltimore that year, Hellickson recorded a career-worst 1.92 HR/9, 5.43 ERA, and 5.77 FIP.

Hellickson’s 2017 is likely the reason for Steamer’s bearish outlook in 2019. Hellickson has always been a fly ball pitcher, so home runs are part of his game, but his highest HR/9 prior to 2017 was 1.36 in 2015. Most other seasons have been in the 1.1 or 1.2 range. Nonetheless, Steamer forecasts 1.59 HR/9, which balloons his projected ERA and FIP over five. I get that fly ball pitchers and Yankee Stadium don’t mix well, but when we’re talking about a sixth or seventh starter, beggars can’t be choosers. He might not be as good as he was in 2018, but I’m certainly not as low on him as Steamer.

Ervin Santana

Finger injuries ruined Santana’s 2018. He made just five starts that aren’t even worth talking about. All you need to know is that he was horrendous. The two years prior are different stories, however. For the Twins in 2016 and 2017, Santana totaled 6.2 fWAR and ERAs in the low threes. Granted, Santana is now 36 and his best days are most certainly behind him. He can’t be that far removed from his 2017 ability though, right?

Steamer disagrees and basically thinks he’s done as an effective starter, calling for an ERA and FIP above five. With his health and projection in mind, it’s a risky proposition to start Santana every fifth day from the get-go, so he will probably have to settle for the type of role the Yankees have available.

The Others

There are a handful of others who’ve been around the block, such as James Shields and Jason Hammel. I’m not very confident in options like those two exceeding the contribution that Cessa et. al. could provide, though a minor league deal wouldn’t hurt. Ditto goes for hurlers like Edwin Jackson, Doug Fister, Josh Tomlin, and Yovani Gallardo. Let’s not mention Clay Buchholz; the thought of him in pinstripes is rather unpleasant. Finally, you might have noticed I excluded Gio Gonzalez, who although still available, I don’t think it’s worth considering because he shouldn’t have to settle.